Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/COA News

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was delete. FCYTravis 7 July 2005 00:02 (UTC)

COA News
Spam. The same contributor added a link to the COA News web site in 20 or so articles last week. Rhobite July 1, 2005 00:42 (UTC)
 * Regardless of whether or not what you say about the link additions is true, you're going to have to judge the actual content of this article. Toban July 1, 2005
 * It is true, check Special:Contributions/65.49.1.54. As for this article, it's an ad for a relatively unknown news web site, which violates Wikipedia's policy on self-promotion. Rhobite July 1, 2005 01:21 (UTC)


 * Delete. Only 9 displayed hits for "COA News" currents; Alexa rank 664,255; likely self-promotion--site in Ontario, anon contrib's IP from an ISP serving eastern Canada. Niteowlneils 1 July 2005 02:18 (UTC)
 * Delete self promotion. JamesBurns 1 July 2005 04:38 (UTC)
 * Delete ad -Harmil 1 July 2005 11:48 (UTC)
 * Keep. 4000 Google hits, and news sources are usually notable.  Besides, a website like Wikipedia which fights bias and serves no banner is probably one of the first places people would want to go if they wanted to learn about where their news is coming from.  Almafeta 1 July 2005 12:28 (UTC)
 * Delete per low Alexa rank. Radiant_ &gt;|&lt; July 1, 2005 14:06 (UTC)
 * Delete Spam advertising. --Tysto 2005 July 1 23:53 (UTC)

I'm really not sure why a website needs to have a high Alexa rank to deserve an article. Is Wikipedia supposed to be only for very popular websites and organizations? If so I think many, many other articles may need to be deleted.infoawareness 2005 July 4 14:23 (UTC)
 * Keep. If you notice I added the 20 links to pages that directly relate to COA News - this is not spam but adding to wikipeida - I'm just participating, and adding links/pages I feel should be added. The article was written in an objective manner, if you disaggree please direct me to the section of the article that you feel in not objective, and perhaps I will change it.
 * Delete. NN. Jayjg (talk) 5 July 2005 21:30 (UTC)
 * ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be placed on a related article talk page, if one exists; in an undeletion request, if it does not; or below this section.