Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Finda (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Shimeru 18:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Finda

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

It is not apparent that this page serves any more than a spot through which an advertising directory could receive more traffic. Keesiewonder talk 13:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Question can some admin explain to me the history of this article? I got a notification from a bot about this AfD and when I look at the history for Finda it looks as though I created the article with the edit summary "db web"! I'm not that crazy... Thanks in advance for clearing up that mystery. Pascal.Tesson 16:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Not an admin, but I know the answer - the creator account has since been deleted so is no longer showing up. Irides centi  22:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That makes perfect sense. Pascal.Tesson 22:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:CORP, WP:N Orderinchaos78 03:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 11:19, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

* Keep per WP:WEB, and reasons brought forward in Articles for deletion/Finda, as it stands finda is a valid competitor to Trade Me, it is well known, but the name isn't as sticky as Trade Me, also note, reference #1, could technically be called bias due to same parent company, and hence cannot be considered independant for WP:WEB Criteria #1, however the remaining 3 references, are from my knowledge independant. --NigelJ talk 11:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete/Merge Suddenly, I find myself realising why it's nominated, I did some thinking about this matter on the bus today, and worked out why it should be deleted, the site is not particularly notable, there are been little/no press coverage (even by parent company APN's publications), the company has a small market share, (but still is Trade Me's largest competitor). Not to mention, that one source is bias, and another no longer exists.  The other two are from places I've never heard of.  My solution is complete deletion for not been notable, or merged into APN News & Media. --NigelJ talk 23:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Seems like multiple reliable sources have been provided. Ab e g92 contribs 16:36, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, but it needs editing, particularly concerning capitalization. Realkyhick 22:19, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletions.   -- SimonLyall 07:10, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - No assertion of notability. Fails WP:CORP.--Bryson 14:19, 29 March 2007 (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.