Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ThisIsLike


 * 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. Skomorokh, barbarian  16:25, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

ThisIsLike

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

non notable website Ddloe (talk) 12:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't agree that the website is not notable. It's 2 years old, it's used by thousands of people for all kinds of purposes – from finding art grants to learning more about Cote d'Ivoir toxic dump in 2006, it's been noted by such reputable publications as ReadWriteWeb (see reference in the article), several bloggers around the world. There is also an original idea behind it. I don't know that much about the rules of Wikipedia yet – should I invite the website's users to contribute here on this page? Also, @Ddloe – on the same day you proposed to delete two other articles – on MobileSpin.Net and Welluma.Com for the same reason. If you look them up on Alexa you'll see that they don't have nearly the same positions as ThisIsLike. You also used the number of hits on Google to see whether it's notable or not, well, first of all, if you just Google thisislike it gives about 800 000 results, if you just google http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Athisislike.com it gives 454 000 pages. For a website, where all content was manually entered by editors, I find it's a bit offensive to say it's not "notable". DeeMeeTree (talk) 02:07, 8 October 2009 (CET)


 * Delete - ThisIsLike has 1,680 to 2,380 hits on Google (+"thisislike" -site:thisislike.com), not 800,00 or 454,000. No articles on gNews, gScholar, or gBooks. Deleting a Wikipedia article is not an attack on the subject of the article. ThisIsLike appears to be a very useful site. However, Wikipedia has guidelines for notability which requires that the subject receive significant coverage is reliable secondary sources. The site has not received such coverage, and is thus considered non-notable. --Odie5533 (talk) 15:00, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Creator and primary editor has COI (not a reason to delete, just figured I should note it), fails WP:WEB. — neuro  11:45, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - First of all, I should say that I looked at the guidelines for notability before posting the article. And I didn't know that 2000 mentions on other websites (as you pointed out above) is not enough for something to be considered "notable". In fact, lots of articles on Wikipedia have less mentions and in sources with much less credibility, should we delete them too? When I said 800 000 I meant that's how many pages there are, which just shows you how much people worked on it. I understand that it doesn't matter either, the only credible thing is to be mentioned in the popular press, right? But then, ReadWriteWeb is one of the leading technology blogs, 3rd biggest one to be precise, syndicated by The New York Times. If that's not enough, I don't know what is. DeeMeeTree (talk) 19:40, 12 October 2009 (CET)
 * You may wish to have a look at WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, a commonly accepted Wikipedia norm. It states that each article should be judged by its own merits at AfD, and should not be contingent on the existence of other articles. If you do not believe certain other articles belong here, you are free to nominate those for deletion. Glass  Cobra  14:04, 14 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Super-Super-Absolutely-Unequivocally-Irrevocably Strong Delete. Does not follow WP:NPOV. No introduction. Page will be tagged.--Berlin Approach | Lufthansa 533 at FLT230 10:22, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Just so you know, the added superlatives don't give your statement any more weight. What matters is strength of argument. Glass  Cobra  14:04, 14 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per Neurolysis and Odie. COI concerns, no significant claim of notability to clear WP:WEB. Glass  Cobra  14:04, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Could you please show me exactly what your "notability" concerns are? The website complies with both the 1st and the 3rd criteria of WP:WEB. ThisIsLike's content is being distributed on such notable websites as WayToRussia.Net (which has the audience of more than 1.5 Mln and is the most popular online travel guide to Russia recommended by Lonely Planet and BBC) and is used for research on various news items by journalists. The sources that wrote about it are some of the most notable on the web for this thematics. The idea of ThisIsLike – people-powered associative search - is new and original, you won't find any other service that offers the same thing and ReadWriteWeb article mentioned it as well. --DeeMeeTree (talk) 22:49, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * *Please only make a bolded vote one time. Glass  Cobra  14:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Please don't tell me what to do and what not to do. Who are you? --Dmitri (talk) 20:49, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. UltraMagnusspeak 13:02, 15 October 2009 (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.