Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phone Losers of America (Second 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 of the debate was no consensus. Mailer Diablo 22:43, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Phone Losers of America
Vanity, non-notable. Previous vote IMHO was to delete. Delete Ardenn 04:44, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete nn. --Deville (Talk) 05:06, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable webpage, has an Alexa ranking of 78,069 -- T B C ???   ???   ??? 05:12, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete again as nn.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 11:12, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - Per nom.  K ilo-Lima|(talk) 13:44, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Staxringold 16:52, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above --Khoikhoi 22:38, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. Ranks top of an Alexa category.  Might have Alexa ranking of 78,069 - how many other articles on Wikipedia have a website about them?  Probably over 500,000, most with clearly lower Alexa rankings.  This is well above some articles that are kept on Wikipedia.  Andymc 23:57, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable --Masssiveego 08:13, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep GNAA, et al. have pages. --Tokachu 10:01, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - (Disclosure: I'm the Rob T Firefly mentioned in the article, and make no claim to neutrality in this matter.) - This article survived a deletion attempt exactly four weeks ago. If all five "delete" votes from last month somehow outrank the well-over five distinct keep votes by verifiable users, why was it not deleted as part of the normal deletion process instead of having a new AFD nomination?  The administrator, Sjakkalle, concluded that AFD nomination by keeping it.  I really doubt it's in the spirit of Wikipedia to completely ignore and discount the administrator's decision from no more than four weeks ago simply because you disagree with it. Rob T Firefly 05:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Didn't we go through this about a month ago? As far as I know, it survived. --Murd0c516 14:21, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - same reasons as before. --Myles Long 18:19, 20 March 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.