Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kideos.com


 * 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. ( X! ·  talk )  · @904  · 20:41, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Kideos.com

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

nn website--Localteche (talk) 20:15, 6 August 2009 (UTC) Localteche (talk) 20:15, 6 August 2009 (UTC)


 * (Indented, account blocked as a sock) This is an established site. There is nothing wrong with this page. I don't see what was wrong with it in the first place. (Yes, I did edit part of the article, but I only added the content box). Look up the site, this is a website with a strong page rank and is prominent within the media. Ferrari2000 (talk) 23:34, 6 August 2009. — Ferrari2000 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Note. This article has been moved to Kideos. Greg Tyler (t &bull; c) 17:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable enough. Sufficient mention in secondary news sources, written neutrally, topic lacking in coverage on Wikipedia. -- &oelig; &trade; 18:38, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  --  Beloved  Freak  22:20, 8 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete The sources are a couple of press releases and a puff piece - hardly evidence of notability. fails WP:CORP. --Cameron Scott (talk) 14:53, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable. Jeni  ( talk ) 15:07, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per Cameron Toddst1 (talk) 15:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Notability not established. Favonian (talk) 15:34, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Falls way short of WP:ORG. The G11 speedies were also fitting, no assertion of notability, no independent sources cited (only 2 PRs). Gwen Gale (talk) 19:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Comparable to other sites on Wikipedia including FunBrain and FactMonster. Sufficient mention in MediaWeek, which is a legitimate news source. JohnWiki7 (talk) 17:12, 10 August 2009 (UTC) — JohnWiki7 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep Agree with œ™ and JohnWiki7. Established site that is growing in the online video community.  Sufficient sources and unbiased opinion. Samiam8 (talk) 02:22, 11 August 2009 (UTC) — Samiam8 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * 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.