Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Molecularpedia


 * 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 speedy delete. &mdash;Xezbeth 18:05, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Molecularpedia
ZERO google hits! Entirely non-notable wiki failing pretty much every guideline/policy. Pretty much just an advert for a site that hasn't even made Google yet. Wickethewok 01:17, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Reply: So, you are seeking to eliminate a page to a site that is new...simply because it is new? Which guideline/policies does the page fail, other than being new? --MBurbank 01:37, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete WP is for stuff that is already notable, not a place to advertise and help something become notable. TJ Spyke 01:40, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Site appears to have been launched just today. Wikipedia is not an advertising platform or web directory. Fails WP:WEB. Bwithh 01:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. -- Kf4bdy talk contribs 02:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. Non-notable, one day old wiki with only one active contributor.-- TBC Φ  talk?  03:48, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. One day old wiki, that's probably record. Pavel Vozenilek 03:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per above.   Dooms  Day34  9  04:08, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - whqt is molecularpedia?Bakaman Bakatalk 04:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:WEB -- zzuuzz (talk) 04:20, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Just check its stats - Only 1 user, only 5 legit pages (probably less)... Massive fail. -Masamunemaniac 04:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. These things are why I am not dead set against expanding speedy deletion criteria. -Amarkov babble 05:09, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete-non notable. Nileena joseph 06:08, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, non notable site. Wikipedia should not be used to gain notability, it should document already established notability. J I P  | Talk 06:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - nn. --MaNeMeBasat 07:07, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:WEB. Being a wiki is not inherently a claim to notability. A wiki that consists of only four pages of content, all copied under GFDL from Wikipedia, is not ready to publicize itself yet anywhere, much less on Wikipedia. --Metropolitan90 07:53, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete A website that returns 0 google hits cannot possibly be notable. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 10:59, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per above and WP:SNOW. MER-C 11:17, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per Metropolitan90 and others. A day-old wiki with 4 pages and no original content is a speedy for sure. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  13:26, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as WP:CSD, unremarkable Web content. So tagged. —Caesura(t) 16:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as per nom.Devapriya 16:46, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete kill with fire. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 17:05, 29 October 2006 (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.