Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Who-Remembers-Me.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. Lack of reliable sources was a problem... article could be recreated if they're found. W.marsh 16:27, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Who-Remembers-Me.com
Speedied and then tagged for hangon (with no comment though). I didn't see this as being a speedy because the claim of 2 million users is an assertion of some sort of notability. This claim is completely unverified though and a bit suspicious. In fact the only thing that this website is possibly notable for is being a vehicle for spam. which doesn't meet WP:WEB. I'd say this is a good candidate to be Deleted.--Isotope23 16:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment It does have a hint of unnotability about it, but it has only been created today. I would suggest a references tag, because 2 million users could be notable if verified, and that is was ref maintenance tags are for. It would also need cleaning up because I think it has a few lines of advert inadvertently mixed in with it. I'll go ahead and add the tags to it now. SGGH 16:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem is I don't think those claims can be independantly verified by reliable sources.--Isotope23 16:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak delete - delete unless sources can be found. Walton monarchist89 17:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - I know blogs aren't reliable sources, but this is the sort of thing that would be talked about in blogs, and there are only 324 ghits, most of which either advertise the site or complain about it spamming.--Jamoche 18:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * weak keep If recent, such counts imply probable continued notability, and the references tag is right. Where should people looks for information about web sites, if not here? I  didn't know we delete because others may spam.DGG 01:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem with those counts is that, at least from what I can see, there isn't one external reliable source that verifies them. 2 million users would be notable if true, but without verification  it is sort of meaningless.--Isotope23 02:58, 1 February 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.