Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IMVU


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 11:51, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

IMVU

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Software seems to fail WP:GNG. &mdash; Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 01:19, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 01:31, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. Google result: 2,690,000. It's notable. --Ifnord (talk) 01:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:GOOGLEHIT? BTW, this argument is specifically bad for iPhone software. &mdash; Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 01:35, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It's not an absolute barometer but it does give a good, general idea. With over two and a half million hits, I really can't see someone saying it's not notable. I'm neither bonded to the issue nor have I written anything about it, so I won't cry if it's deleted, but it seems to meet criteria for inclusion. I notice the AfD tag was removed from the article, I have replaced it. --Ifnord (talk) 17:29, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. Not only is it a major successful business, but it's a key example in Eric Ries's Lean Startup story. Snori (talk) 02:17, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The examples are supposed to go to pages they serve, aren't they? Being useful is not the same as being notable, and notability isn't inherited. &mdash; Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 09:21, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Forbes and two prominent industry sources are more than enough to establish notability per WP:N. It needs some serious clean-up, though. Achowat (talk) 18:39, 19 January 2012 (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.