Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RateMyProfessors.com

RateMyProfessors.com
Talk page shows movement to add to VfD, adding now. Non-notable, misnamed(I think), eh. Related:RateMyTeachers.com hfool 23:59, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Nothing but the article links to this subpage, so I think this VfD was lost somehow. Placed back on the main VfD subpage. - RedWordSmith 00:52, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: A notorious advertised site, and Wikipedia is not a web guide.  Geogre 01:25, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. A notorious site. Intrigue 03:26, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. A useful, yet notorious site. -Jameth 05:08, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not famous enough. utcursch 13:07, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep it. &mdash;[[en:RaD Man|RaD Man (talk)]] 15:20, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Just another website. P Ingerson 18:19, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Normally I am opposed to entries that just advertise a company or service, but this one seems more useful than most. Katefan0 19:16, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: please explain further why "this one seems more useful than most". As of 21:09, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC), it looks like nothing more than a web guide type entry. (Note that I'm not voting with this comment.) JesseW 21:09, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * To elaborate: This site itself (not necessarily the wiki entry) seems more useful than most of the dross corporate sites I've seen on here.  As a recent college graduate, I remember how useful my university's internal "professor commentary" system was, I assume this goes along the same lines. I don't really think the site is particularly "notable" in an encyclopedic sense, though, which is the reason my vote is weak for keep. Katefan0 21:46, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable. Wyss 21:13, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable website. See  and .  Alexa traffic rank is 8,386. --Goobergunch|? 01:54, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, hope for expansion and NPOV. Notably controversial as well as notable in itself. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 02:48, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, a notable website. --Quintin3265 05:06, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep for being a highly notable website. Google reports over 185,000 hits to "ratemyprofessors.com" as well.  With time this article will grow, until then there is no sense in destroying the perfectly valid content which exists now. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 17:31, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep as unusually notable. Samaritan 20:24, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep Spinboy 21:03, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Ratemyteachers.com -- both articles would benefit from shared coverage, and they don't differ that much anyhow. --Improv 22:12, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep -- I think it's notable enough to get an article; I seem to recall it even being featured in one or two major newspapers.--Soup of the Gods 23:27, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm going to college right now, and that site's pretty notable around here. --Szyslak 19:50, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. I've heard a lot about that site.  It seems notable to me.  --L33tminion | (talk) 20:03, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * keep Yuckfoo 09:05, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - rernst 15:02, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Wow, a website. Delete. &mdash;tregoweth 22:29, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * Wow, a website. Keep. The Recycling Troll 23:52, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Cavalierdaily.com, Northwest Arkansas Times, Orlando Sentinel, St. Cloud Times, and even the Onion are currently listed on Google News as mentioning the site in last couple of weeks, all in completely unrelated articles. Strangely, my Typography teacher encouraged me (the class, really) to use this site. How weird is that? --  user:zanimum
 * Keep A valid, and relevant, summarization of a notable cultural phenomenon in Canada.  (Besides which, my personal rating is pretty good ...)  CJCurrie 01:02, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)