Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PopText


 * 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 to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 12:41, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

PopText
Non-notable blog. Google turns up a lot of hits on the word "poptext", but only a comparative handful are about this blog. And the few direct google hits there are seem to be confined mainly to other blogs. → Ξxtreme Unction {yak ł blah } 14:12, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable. 03:30, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep
 * a) Is it a problem that this blog is primarily significant only within a particular (albeit large) community?
 * b) Non-blog references to PopText:
 * Sunday Times: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22872-1700203,00.html
 * BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4438526.stm
 * Pitchfork: (Reference) http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/tracks/05-10-31.shtml
 * c) Is Wikipedia really a slave to Google? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtmichcock (talk • contribs) 22:30, November 23, 2005

'''RELISTING in hopes of further debate and some sort of consensus. Please place new discussion below this line.''' → Ξxtreme Unction {yak ł blah } 14:48, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Vanity, spam. Delete. - Mike Rosoft 15:47, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Mike Rosoft; news articles are just general articles about Pop related blogs; if they were in depth or did more than just list it, I might feel differently. Peyna 15:58, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete; nn. mikka (t) 20:38, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, uncyclopedic. All the article states is that Poptext "is a blog".  HackJandy 22:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep I just did a bit of a cleanup though it still needs some work. I think it's an important and notable mp3 blog that's gaining buckets of popularity with every passing day.  It's been mentioned in the press (ok, just a tiny bit but it is something) and is a big part of the community. The word itself is interesting as well if its use kicks off. It's not quite as popular as something like Fluxblog but it's getting there.  I'm slightly biased because I'm a reader (though don't know the author personally or anything like that) but I think it should stay if we're to have articles on mp3 blogs or other such websites at all.  Jellypuzzle 18:21, 5 December 2005 (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.