Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Informedbanking.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 of the debate was: Speedily deleted - Mike Rosoft 22:34, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Informedbanking.com

Non-notable website. Google shows only 1 website linking to them. Xyzzyplugh 00:23, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Dustimagic! ^(T/C) 00:25, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the actual page before deleting, especially about the fact that the site has been down the past several years due to hackers. Also, there are several Google references, from the Swiss Gnome's page, to Qualisteam, in France. Furthermore, I imagine you are requesting the deletion on the grounds that you feel this addition is SPAM or advertising. I have to disagree. There is a real person who wrote that entry, without bias towards the benefit of visiting the site, nor encouraging any users to visit the site.

To review the history of the site, please see the Way Back Engine.

Regards - InformedBanker — Preceding unsigned comment added by Informedbanker (talk • contribs) at 00:36, 13 February 2006

The article is being proposed for deletion because the subject, your website, is not notable. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28websites%29 --Xyzzyplugh 00:47, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Does not meet WP:WEB (also no Alexa rank), advertising/promotion. —ERcheck @ 00:36, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- ERcheck, just FYI, Alexa is, at the moment, not a WP:WEB criterion. --Perfecto 00:50, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I am aware that Alexa is not a criteria, but it gives a sense of significance of the site (see Wikipedia:Google test.) —ERcheck @ 01:04, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Arbustoo 00:53, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I missed the Web criterion page. After reading the main criteria page, I assumed as long as it was not advertising/spam, it would be fine. You've got my OK to delete. - InformedBanker
- Comment - ok to speedy delete per article creator and only contributor (A7) —ERcheck @ 01:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. With few Google hits and no Alexa data, this is wholly non-notable. Royal Blue 02:10, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nn. Blnguyen 02:36, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per above --† Ðy§ep§ion † ^{Speak your mind} 02:57, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete per CSD G7 per the above comment by InformedBanker. --Zsinj^Talk 03:41, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete per nom and advertisement.,,,,,Ariele 03:49, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Royal Blue. Mikker ^... 04:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per spam Tawker 09:36, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete Per {{db-author}} request above Avi 16:09, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per above Compu te r Jo e 17:17, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.