Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Motorcycle Superstore (2nd nomination)


 * 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   no consensus.  Sandstein  19:09, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Motorcycle Superstore
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )


 * Delete. WP is not the Yellow Pages. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 22:46, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * How does this nomination differ from the first one? Are you asserting it doesn't meet notability guidelines? This isn't a directory per WP:NOTDIRECTORY. tedder (talk) 22:50, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The article does not meet the spirit of WP:NOT and per the essay at WP:MILL. I don't want WP to be a business directory and I want editors to build up actual encyclopaedia articles not turning WP into a free advertising service. The inclusionists who hover around here are not seeing the bigger picture. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 22:58, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:00, 13 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Nothing has changed since previous AfD three months ago. Proposer offers no reason why that decision was incorrect or should be revisited. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:13, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep – Per the following sources, comprised of significant coverage about the topic:
 * Motorcycle Superstore's beginnings not unlike many powersports retailers
 * Motorcycle Superstore revs up mobile commerce initiatives
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 03:00, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Still run of the mill. There are thousands of internet retailers exactly like this one. The only significant coverage has been limited to industry insider trade journals, notable for credulously parroting company PR, e.g. "Bad reviews travels fast online: Motorcycle Superstore seeks to nip 'em the bud". That is not actual journalism. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:44, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - Rather than rehashing the previous AFD, suffice it to say that a look there offers plenty of links and rationale that justify inclusion.   Dennis Brown    (talk)   (contrib)  01:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep The point of WP:NOT is presentational - that we should present material in the style of an encyclopedia, not a directory. This means that we would tend to exclude addresses, phone numbers, stocklists, prices and promotional copy.  It does not mean that we exclude subjects altogether because that would be censorship. Warden (talk) 12:49, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree. IMO, the point of WP:NOT is a fundamental question: "does this article belong in an encyclopedia?"  The point of WP:MILL is that a single member of a large class of things must be in some way NOTABLE among its peers - as the picture of many houses on WP:MILL demonstrates.  This one's blue, that one's purple, that one's green - no fundamental differences. Google search results for "internet motorcycle accessories" puts it 4th, after the sponsored links (where it's 3rd), but Google rank can change rapidly.  I tend more towards inclusionism than exclusionism, but I have to question: why does this particular internet retailer stand out among its peers? Because I don't really see evidence of it on the page.  Weak deleteMarikafragen (talk) 03:24, 26 April 2012 (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.