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 keep. In view of additional references that provide the GNG rationale. Tone 10:02, 23 July 2020 (UTC)reply
This article has been created for a while, but doesn't seem to pass Wikipedia's notability standards. Basically all the citations on this article are either not reliable sources or they didn't discuss this subject in sufficient details (if at all) or both. I also tried to do some quick search on the internet, but can't really find any editorial coverage. I believe a discussion around this page needs to happen.
Edit: I just found out that the page has in fact been nominated for deletion four times before now, and the consensus has been to delete all four times. Seems, this article is being continuously recreated, despite the lack of notability. I advise that the topic should be protected from further recreations, if it is deleted again this time.
Jamie Tubers (
talk) 16:39, 8 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Since the last discussion was four years ago, G4 ("Recreation of material deleted via a deletion discussion") probably doesn't apply. (
t ·
c) buidhe 21:23, 8 July 2020 (UTC)reply
True, the last discussion closed in 2016. However, this recreation was made the same year, but for some weird reasons escaped nomination for 4 years.--
Jamie Tubers (
talk) 14:34, 9 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment: I find it ironic. This page was deleted 4 times through AfD, yet it was still recreated less than a year after it was deleted. It should've been
protected from creation indefinitely years ago after being deleted for the 4th time. 🤔 ASTIG😎(
ICE T •
ICE CUBE) 16:03, 9 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep At least both
[1] and
[2] are significant coverage. The article has 11 interwikis and
25 readers daily, obviously there is a small but constant demand for that article.
Jklamo (
talk) 22:20, 10 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment: The first link is just a passing mention, while the second link is from some neighbourhood newssite (questionable reliability, and certainly not sufficient to establish notability). Interwiki links or number of readers are quite irrelevant to the notability of the subject.--
Jamie Tubers (
talk) 11:24, 14 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Kj cheetham (
talk) 20:59, 15 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep we have a web site that meets GNG. I have added some RS to the article. We have many news organizations which quote the site, and also link to the photographs. I think we can make a case for
WP:WEBCRIT being met.
Lightburst (
talk) 22:38, 15 July 2020 (UTC)reply
KEEP Is loopnorth
[3] seems like a reliable source and give sit significant coverage.
The National (Abu Dhabi) is a reliable source giving it significant coverage. Looking through the many search results, it is used as a source by a lot of legitimate news sites, quoting what was posted there and showing pictures people uploaded there for anyone to use. Google skyscrapercity.com and you get 7,080 results to sort through.
DreamFocus 00:12, 16 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep per Lightburst and Dream Focus, it is ranked by Alexa as 6,696th in global engagement, and 12 other wikis have an entry as well
Patapsco913 (
talk) 09:45, 16 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete and salt - With 4 prior AFDs ending in delete, it should not have been recreated. It doesn't pass GNG, and if someone has new GNG-qualifying sources to share, that should be brought to DRV. Levivichdubious –
discuss 16:35, 17 July 2020 (UTC)reply
The last AFD was in 2016.
DreamFocus 16:48, 17 July 2020 (UTC)reply
I added some references. I can add more - however I think there are sufficient refs ATM.
Lightburst (
talk) 21:12, 17 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep slim, but enough to bring over GNG, plus reasoning provided above.
Djflem (
talk) 18:39, 18 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep: Per reasons above. By this time, the article is good enough to pass
WP:NWEB. ASTIG😎(
ICE T •
ICE CUBE) 07:30, 21 July 2020 (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.