Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/QuestionSwap


 * 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 delete as no verification provided. Please do bring any additional evidence to my talk page, or questions about how things work, appeals, what it takes to stay, etc, to my talk page. I'm always happy to talk about it. - brenneman  04:43, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

QuestionSwap
Fails WP:WEB Rightfully in First Place 18:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Entry for 2007-01-10 19:31 GMT Apologies for editing (possibly incorrectly) but could someone enlighten me regarding the reasons for the QS wiki entry being considered for deletion?

It said the reasons could be traced/checked on this page, but I see no reason apart from an expansive list of potential reasons.

This page has just been noticed by the main users of QS, and as such has been subject to a sudden storm of changes: mostly minor.

Thanks to any Editor who is willing to spend time explaing this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.249.96.84 (talk • contribs).
 * Hi. The article QuestionSwap was nominated for deletion because an editor thinks it does not meet the qualifications laid out in WP:WEB, our notability guidelines for web sites. If you think that the subject is notable and should be kept, your best bet is to find evidence that QuestionSwap does meet those qualifications and lay them out here.  Please see Guide to deletion for information on how to participate in an AFD discussion. - Vary | Talk 21:13, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment The site has a respectable page rank, and apparently a decent number of members as internet forums go, but bbc article provided as a reference is, unfortunately, a 404. Can the members who have recently taken notice of this article perhaps provide some more (as in, multiple, non-trivial ones?) If kept, though, there's a lot of cruft (like the list of high profile members) that will have to go.  -- Vary | Talk 21:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

KEEP: This wiki entry covers a web phenomenon which has become popular for many reasons. One notable surge of users followed it being featured as one of the "year's 10 best time-killer websites" by the Times Newspaper (UK) I'm unable to provide proof: I didn't keep the paper. Personally, (If the site were my creation) I'd be pretty chuffed with that, and count it as a notable award.. Featured Questions have also been broadcast on Radio 1. (UK) though I'm unsure if they were correctly attributed :(  I speak for many on the board: Not all are net-savy enough to edit these pages. Thanks for your time.  EDIT: and sure.. we can happily ditch the "members" area. :o) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sensiblenick (talk • contribs) 21:38, January 10, 2007
 * Most newspapers keep their archives online. If you could get someone to dig up a link, that would help, but there would need to be more than one to qualify under item one of WP:WEB.  If you can prove that the site's content is re-used by Radio 1, that might qualilfy under item three.  If there's anything out there that will help the site pass wp:web, I'm sure one of your members will be able to turn it up pretty quickly.  I've found a valid link to the click column, and I'm adding it to external links now; you'll still need more than one non-trivial mention in a book/newspaper/magazine to qualify under item one.  It will be up to the participants in the discusion to determine if this or other media references are 'non-trivial.'  -- Vary | Talk 00:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * KEEP - I'm Adam Marmaras and I run QuestionsSwap. It is a non-profit exercise. I know there are adverts on the page but most days they net me $0.00 in revenue. It doesn't cover the hosting. The site has over 1.2 million questions in the database and is a valuable reference for many people, just like Wiki. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.35.90.218 (talk • contribs).


 * Comment A "tidyup" has now occurred in a sincere attempt to bring this Wikipedia Entry in-line with earlier comments regarding the "Members" section. The QS Forums Section has also been edited to distance the reader from any of the specific personalities on the site; hopefully making the entry more useful as a reference. 62.119.149.235 09:32, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment the members section was soemething that would need to be fixed if the page is kept, not in order for the page to be kept. AFD is not a vote, and if proof is not provided that the site passes WP:WEB, as I've requested above, the page will probably be deleted no matter how many of the site's users post Keeps here. -- Vary | Talk 16:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete in absence of any references or proof of notability. -- Vary | Talk 03:38, 15 January 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.