Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OKCupid


 * 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  k eep. - Mailer Diablo 13:14, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

OKCupid

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Appears to be a website that isn't notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia; specifically I don't see it meeting our criteria for website notability. The earlier Prod was removed saying that the association with TheSpark required discussion, which is reasonable. Gwernol 18:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. It seems its most recent press release has been picked up by several print/online media outlets, as per this Google News search for "OKCupid".  Perhaps this helps qualify it under WP:N? —Psychonaut 21:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:WEB which lists the applicable notability criteria, explicitly excludes "Media re-prints of press releases and advertising for the content or site" from counting towards notability. So I'm afraid that doesn't help. Gwernol 21:20, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That same Google News search has a couple articles which seem not to be press release reprints. I don't have time to read the full articles so I don't know if OKCupid is the subject of the articles or gets only a passing mention. —Psychonaut 21:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep multiple verifiable sources Catchpole 22:11, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Could you do me a favor and list them? There are none in the article itself, nor any yet cited in this discussion. Thanks, Gwernol 23:48, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep 4,000,000 members is a pretty strong number, and Alexa rank is 2974. Google News shows a number of articles. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  23:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Similarly any chance of a verifiable source for that figure? I couldn't find it on OKCupid's site, for example. Thanks, Gwernol 23:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Honestly, no, although anywhere you look the numbers are pretty good. This article claims 2 million monthly unique users and 500K "active" accounts.  To put that into perspective, Everquest even at its height had less than 500K accounts. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  00:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep There's some media coverage beyond reprints of press releases, including the New York Post Wired also wrote an article about the site.  That's all I could dig up, but that's enough for me to think that it gets past WP:WEB -  The Bethling (Talk) 01:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. Heavily trafficked dating/social site, descended from TheSpark. Thunderbunny 07:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. Okcupid it easily notable enough, even though the article currently does not reference any of the several independent articles published about it . In fact, the pretty interesting data mining techniques they use are what really sets Okcupid apart from other dating sites; that would warrant some discussion in the article. --Jonik 12:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep there's enough outside media references to make it notable. JuJube 23:02, 3 February 2007 (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.