Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/4marks

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. Kevin (talk) 02:47, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

4marks

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable website. Fails the primary criterion - no secondary sources in Google. Traffic rank of ~294,000. Leuko ^Talk/_Contribs 03:47, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Strong delete No decent sources, very poor article in my opinion DRosin (talk) 11:43, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Strong Keep~~ Sources can be added, and will be added soon by me, and as this is one of my first articles I am working on improving it still. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.220.174 (talk) 18:08, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Removed due to sockpuppetry. Leuko ^Talk/_Contribs 16:59, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this website. Joe Chill (talk) 22:24, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The biggest social networking website for Catholics. Don't even think about being "racist" against Catholics! OmniWikia (talk) 16:34, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Please refrain from personal attacks in accusing other editors of racism. Thank you. Leuko ^Talk/_Contribs 16:59, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. And Catholics are not a race. --Sooo Kawaii!!! ^__^ (talk) 17:29, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable - No news or scholarly reference, one book reference (a footnote reference to an article published on 4Marks.com "Porn: The Marriage Wrecker). --4wajzkd02 (talk) 17:36, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator note User:OmniWikia has been blocked 1 month for vandalism and sock puppetry, with 24.118.220.174 being blocked 1 week as a sock puppet. MuZemike 21:05, 6 December 2009 (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.