Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kabooza


 * 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. Non-notable CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 06:20, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Kabooza

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

Notability issues:

This site is not known by alexa: http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/kabooza.com

and google returns only 21 results:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=kabooza.com+-site%3Akabooza.com&btnG=Search Photoact (talk) 13:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete: A non-notable website. Schuym1 (talk) 13:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, spammish and hardly asserting notability.--Tikiwont (talk) 13:33, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete fails A7/web miserably, although the article is worth reading for the bizarre and poorly-written section where it tries to compare itself to an octopus (!?), including "Kabooza will survive all your mishaps!" which is my new phrase of the day. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * All your base are belong to us, er, I mean delete as not asserting notability. No RS, No V. No significant media coverage. Cheers,   Dloh  cierekim  16:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I have notified creator of this discussion.  Dloh  cierekim  16:04, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Do Not Delete: A interesting website. I have been watching this area for a long time and when I found a new site on http://www.backupreview.info/directory/ that seemed interesting I thought it was worth adding. I am sure they will be getting alot of coverage soon. How much would be there need to be before you think its notable? I have done a lot work to find the material for this article. Photoman365 (talk) 19:37, 2 September 2008 (ECT)
 * Wikipedia is not a Crystal Ball. We cannot have articles on subjects that might one day be notable. See WP:WEB for notability requirements. Cheers,   Dloh  cierekim  18:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Doesn't satisfy Wiki's current notability criteria for websites. I might have just discovered a new favourite word, however... 23skidoo (talk) 22:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete A7 WikiScrubber (talk) 09:15, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Do Not Delete: I understand what you are saying. I still feel that many Wikipedia readers can find this interesting and valuable. I have not found *any* other automatic backup services geared directly to photographers. I know many friends that have lost all their pictures when their computer broke. Tragic events that can be avoided. I consider this Public service. Photoman365 (talk) 09:42, 5 September 2008 (ECT)
 * Comment Sorry, only one !vote per editor. :)This issue is not interesting or useful content. The issue is whether or not subject meets notability guidelines. Cheers, 15:18, 5 September 2008 (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.