Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jobspeed


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 02:29, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Jobspeed

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This nomination was malformed, it was redlinked in the AfD list. Nominator will be asked to come and provide deletion rationale. I remain neutral. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 08:33, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep as theres no valid argument for deletion. Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  13:57, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, not yet there isn't. Why don't you wait til the original nominator has had a chance to provide his/her rationale? Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 14:36, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * If s/he provides an argument, than i will review it. Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  14:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I suspect that has not yet understood our criteria and that this is a tit-for-tat nomination after . Uncle G (talk) 16:02, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:15, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:15, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete, despite the lack of a rationale, I'm not sure that this site meets WP:WEB. Lankiveil (speak to me) 00:24, 27 June 2010 (UTC).


 * [Nomination, implicit delete] Inclusion of this site on Wikipedia is a joke. It has absolutely no traffic (check Alexa), less than 50 jobs listed. This is not a 'tit for tat' deletion but rules should be across the board. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oz 311 (talk • contribs) 04:06, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oz 311 is the user who placed the AfD tag on the article. I added the "[Nomination…]" notation to the front of his comment for ease of identification by other participants in the AfD. —C.Fred (talk) 04:12, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Looking at the sources, they're all relatively minor depth of coverage and all two years old. Accordingly, I don't think it meets WP:GNG, and nothing jumps out at me that would make it meet WP:WEB. —C.Fred (talk) 04:14, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as article fails WP:WEB. Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  16:25, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:WEB and appears to be an advert for a bsuiness. Orderinchaos 10:07, 29 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Agree with everyone above. This is more like an advert and being purposedly pushed again and again. (talk —Preceding undated comment added 09:24, 1 July 2010 (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.