Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Website Magazine


 * 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 and Salt -- JForget 01:58, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Website Magazine

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Speedied twice now. Was tagged for A1, which I think is overly steep, but 3 times recreation warrents an AfD in my oppinion. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 00:05, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails to assert notability. Who runs this?  What is it?  This is a two-line blurb about some unknown magazine. If I want to read about websites, I go to Google, not order treeware. -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 00:27, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete and salt per CSD G4: recreation of deleted material. After two speedies this still hasn't been fixed. Looks unlikely it will at this rate. L337 kybldmstr (talk) 00:35, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Can't really do a speedy, this is the first AFD. -- Dennis The Tiger  (Rawr and stuff) 00:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: AS Dennis noted, G4 only applies to articles that were deleted in a previous XfD discussion. ~ | twsx | talkcont | 10:47, 22 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete fails to assert notability. Snigbrook (talk) 02:19, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: Non notable. No speedy, just AfD delete (then when it is recreated, it will qualify for speedy). - Rjd0060 (talk) 02:41, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTE -- ¿Amar៛ Talk to me / My edits 05:10, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:N, although i guess it would meet speedy deletion criteria. As it was recreated a number of times already, speedy and salt per G4 if recreated after the deletion. ~ | twsx | talkcont | 10:47, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Again, you cannot speedy delete this article. First of all, it hasn't been the discussion of a deletion discussion.  Secondly, if you read the G4 criteria, it states that it does not apply to speedy deletions, and also, it must be substantially identical to the deleted version, which I don't think anybody can prove anyways. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:13, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Did you even read my post? ~ | twsx | talkcont | 19:10, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes. It said that you would like it deleted because of notability.  You also said that "although i guess it would meet speedy", which I was just reminding you, is incorrect.   - Rjd0060 (talk) 21:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * But G4 is not the only criteria for speedy deletion, it is likely the article would have been deleted per A1 or A7.Snigbrook (talk) 00:30, 23 November 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.