Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ECritters/old

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled ECritters.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to delete the article.

A website which no longer exists. I'm wondering if the person listing it isn't the one who cracked it and is bragging about the fact. RickK 22:34, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I created the page, and I am definatly not the cracker. I was a moderator on the website. And it may come back, depending on if the owner pays for it to be recovered or not.--24.52.49.203
 * Smells like a cracker brag. Whatever the site was, it's dead now. Article isn't much of a stub. Delete. -- Cyrius|&#9998 02:27, May 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * Oh yes. I'm definatly bragging that I brought the site down. Sarcasm ends. And the site is back up. Article should stay.--24.52.49.203
 * Oh no. I'm "definatly" saying that the article is vanity and non-encyclopedic.  Sarcasm is alive and well.  Article should go. - Lucky 6.9 20:43, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Neopets has its own article. Why shouldn't any other pet site?--24.52.49.203
 * For one thing, Neopets actually exists. RickK 22:55, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * For another thing, so does eCritters. The URL is http://www.ecritters.biz ; you can check for yourselves.--24.52.49.203
 * Delete: not notable. Wile E. Heresiarch 00:09, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
 * delete, non notable. --Jiang 01:40, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: not notable. (Neopets has >30 million users) General Wesc 22:35, 2004 May 21 (UTC)
 * Delete, this is my site but it isn't notable. It is back up now though. Eurleif 00:45, May 22, 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue or the deletion should be placed on other relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.