Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sportlobster


 * 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. kelapstick(bainuu) 11:55, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Sportlobster

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete, I'm not sure that this article passes WP:CORP. Seems to be a minor platform at best. Article should be completely rewritten if kept but I doubt that a rewrite will fix the issues I see thus why I'm at afd. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 19:06, 17 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - Meets WP:WEBCRIT per, , , ,  (short article). NorthAmerica1000 06:28, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:36, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


 * It should be kept. I do not consider it a minor platform, huge sports stars use the website like Cristiano Renaldo and it is a viable and useful source of sports information, and a great place to connect with like minded sports fans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelvance56 (talk • contribs) 10:09, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 12:14, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - Article has no citations and the name dropping claims do not pass verification. It really does not pass the threshold for notability.  In ether case the article is not worthy of inclusion. - Pmedema (talk) 13:29, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Inline citations have been added to the article to verify content. NorthAmerica1000 22:59, 4 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:N. Only sources I could find were about people investing, made through press releases. RealDealBillMcNeal (talk) 14:34, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 21:59, 4 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment - Several of the sources I posted above expound upon the website's origins, history, usage, coverage and availability. I disagree with the notion of all of the sources available about the website being solely about investment in the company, because plainly put, they're not. Furthermore, I maintain that this topic meets WP:WEBCRIT. Lastly, the article has been copy edited and expanded. NorthAmerica1000 22:51, 4 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - Thanks to NA1K for the article improvements. In reviewing the sources, Sprotlobster is being covered, and yes, it does include funding infromation, but the coverage goes beyond just investing announcement coverage to level where such coverage is significant.  I would say The National article is probably the best example of coverage in that it features SportLobster as the primary subject, covers it in significant depth, and the article isn't at all about covering investments and funding. -- Whpq (talk) 16:05, 7 July 2014 (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.