Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WikiWax


 * 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 As has been said below convincingly, the "reliability" (in the sense of WP:RS) of an individual writer is dependent on the context in which he writes. A notable person's weblog is not necessarily reliable (unless there are independent sources attesting to its caliber.) Analogously, being mentioned by a famous person does not automatically make one famous. With that weblog as the only citation, the article is very weak. The consensus below is established by both numbers and strength of argument. Xoloz 13:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiWax

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable search engine which does not come close to meeting the notability criteria of WP:WEB. If it were not a Wikipedia search engine, I doubt its article would have been created. Prod was contested. Savidan 01:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Doesn't assert notability, either. In future, hit articles that don't assert notability like this with 'db', not 'prod' ;-) Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry 02:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete per lack of significant coverage from independent sources. I dont believe a review on a blog counts as a reliable source Corpx 05:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete as per WP:CSD and WP:WEB. Also fails WP:N. No assertation as to any notability is made. --Nenyedi Talk Deeds@ 12:13, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, and a comment: in fact, Gary Price's (whose blog is quoted) is one of the most highly respected search engine and information service reviewers in the field, so his opinion does count for something; it's not just a random blog. Did anyone take a look for sources? It's certainly a stub; but that doesn't mean it's spam. -- phoebe/ (talk) 15:23, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't say it was spam. Being reviewed by a blog does not make a website notable, however. Savidan 19:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. wikipediatrix 18:32, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep' Depending on the blog, I would accept such reviews. Gary Price has an article in WP, and his blog is accepted as a standard source and could probably b justified for a WP article. DGG (talk) 18:11, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Gary Price writing on his blog is very different from him writing in a published context. It's not edited by anyone; it not fact checkted; etc. Savidan 14:45, 12 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep per above. Vsst 20:51, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per DGG. Mathmo Talk 04:27, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect to Surfwax, Inc. due to insufficient notability and importance. --- RockMFR 01:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom fails WP:N Harlowraman 23:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, the question for this article is notability, and it's really lacking. One review of a website in a blog doesn't help much. The authority of that person doesn't matter, he might authoritably say the service is good, but saying that wouldn't make the service notable in any way. - Bobet 09:16, 17 August 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.