Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Associated Content

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 No consensus. Although there are only three !votes (keep and deletes) and one neutral, there are sufficient number of comments arguing on both sides for me to close this as no consensus. Deathphoenix ʕ 01:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:WEB. Not yet notable. See review here BlueValour 17:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The creator has already blanked the article's Afd tag. BlueValour 17:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Fails WP:WEB. Tevildo 17:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral following updates to article. Not sure whether the linked articles are enough to count against the criteria, so I'll let others more experienced in this issue discuss it further. Tevildo 20:52, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: removed links to Cold Springs Tavern and Saaya Irie in this AfD subpage added by User:212.85.6.26. See history of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Associated Content for details. –Dicty (T/C) 17:38, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment (creator) - I have updated the entry with links with media references and other sites that feature and syndicate content the provided from the users of associatedcontent.com. Please let me know if there are an additions or clarification needed. Some similar sites that have wiki entries include, about.com, squidoo, flickr, YouTube, Photobucket and tagworld. Thanks, Jcurran 21:29, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Alexa ranking of 20,000 is, AFAIK, not too shabby (but nowhere near the "similar sites" listed above). Some evidence of mentions in the media, but they're hard to find due to the nature of the site. I'm thinking this may be a keep, but will sit on the fence for now. --DaveG12345 07:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I had this article on my watchlist because some folks have been mass-adding external links to that site before it was deleted via prod. See [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] And it continued even after the deletion: [7]. Rl 07:53, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Weak keep, fails WP:WEB, heavy vandal magnet. Needs some cleanup. One of the "media references" isn't about the subject at all. --Coredesat talk 05:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete I think it's important to disambiguate the criteria here. As a company, AC does not appear to be notable per nom. As a web site, there aren't any accolades, but there does appear to be coverage by secondary sources. But are these secondary sources noting it for it's innovation? Only one of the media references is working now, the other two appear to have changed perhaps. Ste4k 06:56, 3 July 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.