Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glogster


 * 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   no consensus - keep. Evil saltine (talk) 09:00, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Glogster

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

Does not appear to meet WP:WEB based on references in the article. Stifle (talk) 08:13, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete All the coverage I see are press releases. Gigs (talk) 17:41, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Changed to Weak Keep some of those sources seem reliable enough. Gigs (talk) 20:51, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

(I am not familiar with editing at Wikipedia, so sorry for editing): Why would you delete an article about a project using 300,000 students and teachers around the world?

There are coverage that are not press releases: TechCrunch, WebExpo.

And if you want more articles:

         —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.101.173.231 (talk) 17:21, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Please remove blogs (blogspot/wordpress etc) and other unreliable sources from your list of 79 links.--Otterathome (talk) 13:01, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  21:21, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:56, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:56, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starsign479 (talk • contribs) 08:27, 16 September 2009 (UTC) — Starsign479 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Relisting comment. Debate wasn't sorted so let's give it another 7 days. Yes I know I'm breaking my own relist rules :) --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:59, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:Notable since has a couple secondary sources. People might want to find out about this site, although the article doesn't really give much info more than clicking on the site itself would give you. Still no special reason to delete.Borock (talk) 01:34, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete The CNet coverage is significant, the TechCrunch coverage is borderline significant, the rest seems unreliable, so notability is borderline. Due to the adverty tone, I come down on the side of delete unless there can be found a third reliable, significant source. --Cyber cobra (talk) 01:36, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep There are many articles on Wikipedia about social networks with no more than tens of thousands users. I guess Glogster has several hundred thousands. The article may need some rewriting but it is not neccessary to delete it.
 * Your links are a how-to guide for the site and a blog. Those don't qualify as reliable sources. Number of users is irrelevant; coverage in reliable sources and/or WP:WEB are what's relevant. --Cyber cobra (talk) 08:38, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Discovery has a footage about Glogster on. See the Best of the Rest box, Glogster starts at 02.00.
 * 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.