Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SilverScreenCatalog.com


 * 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. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 09:54, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

SilverScreenCatalog.com
Inherently non-notable. Ezeu 21:33, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Only 2 google hits, 1 to the site, 1 to myspace.  --ColourBurst 21:37, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's pagerank seems to be non-existant and alexa.com has nothing on it. TerraFrost 21:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, abyssmal page ranks and fails WP:WEB, looks like only about a dozen users. Kuru  talk  22:34, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, per WP:WEB. Jacek Kendysz 01:02, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete miserable good-for-nothing junk per WP:WEB. --Slgr @ ndson (page - messages - contribs) 01:28, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete I usually don't mind vanity articles if they're justified and written like every other article, but this is just plain shameless. Blatant vanity article, subject fails WP:WEB and the author is spamming other articles with links... --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 08:43, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment the author of the page also added xlinks to dozen or two obscure movies... which I reverted because they added absolutely nothing to the articles, the same information can be just as easily be got from IMDB. Smells like a marketing attempt/pagerank booster. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 15:14, 23 July 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.