Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PinoyExchange


 * 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   keep. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  05:57, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

PinoyExchange

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

Notability in question. I cannot find 3rd party sources in local newspapers that verifies its notability. Claim of being the Philippines' biggest message board is verified only by one site called big-boards.com (big claims require multiple sources) Lenticel  ( talk ) 04:14, 10 April 2009 (UTC) 
 * Keep - but a very weak keep, only because it seems to have enough different people editing it over the years.  However I do take issue with their self-published sources (I have tagged the article) and the whole thing is a little too advert-ish for me.   Re: notability, google shows over 1mm hits for that term - however only 446 are from outside the site itself, and many of those are worthless link exchange sites.  But again, multiple editors.  JCutter (talk) 04:46, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep: The website has an alexa ranking of under 10,000 and a Google Page Rank of 4, and the traffic within it's demographic seems very high. There are probably sources out there which can assert notability, although I have not been able to find them with a casual search. -- Oliver  Twisted (Talk) (Stuff) 04:57, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions.  —Bluemask (talk) 05:55, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. I personally consider PEx as the most popular online forum/board in the Philippine web, but then I'm not a reliable source for that assertion. :-P FWIW, PEx won the People's Choice Award for the Community category in the 2001 Philippine Web Awards: . --seav (talk) 10:39, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  06:09, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Per good evidence of notability. ChildofMidnight (talk) 16:40, 17 April 2009 (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.