Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FROG (mobile homepage)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 02:45, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

FROG (mobile homepage)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails criterion #1 of WP:WEB. The sources given are all either trivial or unreliable. They all read like press releases. There is no indication that this website is important at all. --- RockMFR 22:24, 21 February 2009 (UTC) 
 * Delete per nom Letsdrinktea (talk) 22:50, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:02, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - I think the coverage refs establish notability. Certainly a few WP:RS there. And I'm not just saying that. § FreeRangeFrog 01:30, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you point out the non-trivial reliable sources that are used? --- RockMFR 02:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * SymbianGuru and PocketPC Mag. § FreeRangeFrog 02:30, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * SymbianGuru link is a 404. PocketPC Mag is a blog which doesn't seem to have any editorial standards or review. Correct me if I'm wrong. --- RockMFR 02:42, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, you scared me. I thought SymbianGuru was gone or something. Well, if the article there is gone or didn't exist, then that does it for that ref. As to the notability of PPM, I consider them to be notable and trustworthy, unless you can point me to a place on Wikipedia where it says I'm not supposed to consider them a good source. § FreeRangeFrog 04:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * And BTW, MobileCrunch is also notable. I didn't notice it before. It's part of the TechCrunch network. § FreeRangeFrog 04:33, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter if a website is notable. It matters if they are reliable. --- RockMFR 17:42, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as it does seem to fail WP:WEB and the quality of the article is questionable (reads like an ad). -- samj in out 02:42, 26 February 2009 (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.