Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Infeeds


 * 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. j⚛e deckertalk 05:58, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Infeeds

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable website/company that fails to demonstrate notability. Lacks non-notable support. red dog six (talk) 14:41, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete: Article about a new web service, contributed by a WP:SPA account. No evidence of attained notability. AllyD (talk) 15:30, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:12, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:13, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:13, 28 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - could probably be speedied under WP:G11 -- but regardless it does not pass WP:CORPDEPTH. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  |  15:30, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete I find all the SPA's protesting on the talk page amazing! Should an SPI be opened? Origamite\(·_·\)(/·_·)/ 16:49, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - web article of unclear notability, lacking significant RS coverage. The Louis Gray ref is the only independent ref; it is a blog, and too brief to be considered significant coverage. A search turned up no RS coverage.Dialectric (talk) 03:41, 5 May 2014 (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.