Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ChnLove


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. Concensus indicates that the site fails to show the required notability according to independent reliable sources. Note that the accounts of four of the keep !votes have only a single edit, all to this article, which may indicate off-wiki canvassing or sock puppetry. Philg88 ♦talk 13:43, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

ChnLove

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article that keeps on getting its speedy deleted, it is a advertisement. And also its a strange web site for a bizarre site it seems (don't want to click on the links). Also seems to have a sock puppet problem as 2 users keep on deleting it. Wgolf (talk) 17:56, 15 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Dear Wgolf, thanks for the time reviewing the article I created and Sorry for deleting the speedy deletion notice mistakenly. I was not familiar with the wikipedia policy at that time. ChnLove page may have some issues and hope you can help with its improvement and editting. Thanks. Cracy111 (talk) 10:01, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - Respectfully disagree with nomination for deletion. As stated in WP:ADMASQ, "a differentiation should be made between spam articles and legitimate articles about commercial entities." This article is not Advertising because it is not "used to encourage, persuade, or manipulate an audience...to take or continue to take some action." The article contains no calls to action or attempts to persuade the reader that the company is better or worse than its competitors. The article is written from a neutral point of view, and serves as a summarized information culled from reliable source. This company is equally as significant as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Match.com, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matchmaker.com ,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemistry.com or many other online dating site lists. This page needs development rather than deletion.StephyGret (talk) 02:45, 18 September 2014 (UTC) — StephyGret (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Keep - To be honest, I don't know anything about this website ( I saw an ad on Google and then i came here to check for more details), in my opinion, the article is helpful to me(at least now i know what it is). And i don't think it's written like an advertisement. So I think it's ok to keep it here. Hanbrito33 (talk) 09:23, 19 September 2014 (UTC) — Hanbrito33 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

1.This page is not for promotion because it only illustrates the basic information about this website (Chnlove) in an objective manner instead of giving the exaggeration of the achievements of a company. It has verifiable resources. Also, it’s not existing to persuade readers to do something irrationally. It doesn’t try to do any harm to readers.
 * I don’t think this page of ChnLove should be deleted for the following reasons:

2.The article is not an advertisement. Referring to Template:Advert wikipedia advert template, the advert tag is for those articles directly trying to sell products to readers, and if an article is simply showing a company’s material from an overall positive perspective, it cannot be tagged as advertisement. This page is for the purpose to help build a useful page for the people who may want to have some knowledge of ChnLove. In all, the page is merely concerned with providing information coming from authoritative sources. Gratmeri (talk) 10:00, 19 September 2014 (UTC) — Gratmeri (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete Notability not shown by reliable independent sources.  The only sources cited are the subject's own page, Alexa (for the ranking) and a site purporting to rank international dating sites, which doesn't itself appear reliable.  See WP:V and WP:RS. NawlinWiki (talk) 17:56, 19 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. No attempt made to show that the site is notable. &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:44, 20 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. A google search reveals no substantive coverage of this site in reliable sources. Absent further evidence, this site is not notable. Dolescum (talk) 23:59, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

1 First, the site Online Personal Watch is not a site purporting to rank international dating sites. It is the dating industry news and commentary for the Dating Industry launched by industry analyst and consultant Mark Brooks. The following are the sources: http://www.crunchbase.com/organization/online-personals-watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUDgRDw1dWo; http://www.onlinedatingmagazine.com/datingoffice09/markbrooks.html 2 The site Online Personal Watch and Mark Brooks have received a lot of authoritative coverage since its establishment. It has been mentioned in sites yahoo.news, usatoday, marketwatch, washingtonpost, nypost
 * Keep - The Online Personals Watch is reliable independent source with verifiability.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/is-your--lover--for-real--picking-the-wrong-online-date-could-cost-you-your-home-174643233.html#4VVtziO

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/05/20/dating-matchmaking-eharmony-matchcom/9276579/

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/5-extreme-ways-to-succeed-on-dating-sites-2014-09-12

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/mobile-dating-apps-grow-in-popularity/2012/08/16/29938bf8-cbc4-11e1-9986-640e8e5f844f_story.html

http://nypost.com/2009/11/29/daters-without-borders/

3 The above are just a few examples. You can find more on this page http://www.onlinepersonalswatch.com/news/in-the-press.html

Online Personal Watch is not a site purporting to rank international dating sites. Who can deny its reliability or Verifiability? This source of the ChnLove page meets the wikipedia norm WP:V and WP:RS Cracy111 (talk) 03:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11306500 --- New Zealand Herald, a daily newspaper published in Auckland, New Zealandwith the largest newspaper circulation of any in the country
 * Keep - ChnLove is notable with substantive coverage in reliable sources. The page meets the Wikipedia's Notability and WP:NRV. You can find some reference and evidence to ChnLove here:

http://ca.shine.yahoo.com/-150-million-dowry-for-chinese-businessman%E2%80%99s-daughter-204344553.html --- a site launched by Yahoo in 2008

http://www.free-press-release.com/news-international-china-dating-chnlove-is-creating-miracles-1337043920.html

http://dating.about.com/u/reviews/asiandating/asianLUR/Jericho-s-chnlove-Review.htm

The site is notable enough to have a page on wikipedia just like many other dating sites on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_online_dating_websites. It needs development rather than deletion. Sorry to post twice and I don't mean to add "Keep" votes. They are just two different points.Cracy111 (talk) 04:16, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Those are just my opinion Billhamus (talk) 08:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC) — Billhamus (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep. When I searched Chnlove, I found this page. In my opinion, it should stay. I know the site Online personals watch mentioned by Cracy111. Online Personals Watch is a respected source of information in the dating industry. Alexa is a California-based subsidiary company of Amazon.com which provides commercial web traffic data and is visited by over 8.8 million people monthly: http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/alexa.com. They are certainly reliable sources for establishing notability. Moreover, the page is about the subject ChnLove and it is useful to add a link to the official website. So visitors can learn more about Chnlove after reading this wikipedia page.
 * Delete As per nom ,RHaworth and Dolescum not notable.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:21, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.