Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Box.net (2nd nomination)
- 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. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 06:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
Not notable, advertising ~Ambrosia- talk 06:31, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 15:30, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Mmmmm, freshly cooked spam! - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 17:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete Appears to pass the letter of WP:WEB per its WebWare 100 award, but the article pales in comparison to the other one-click hosting sites with their own articles (see FileFront, RapidShare, and YouSendIt). Kamek (talk) 20:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Delete G11 (spam). So tagged. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 22:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep. If we were to keep articles like meebo, Xdrive_(website)#Xdrive and omnidrive, box.net is clearly credible enough. I've been using it for 2 years, and very compelling arguments were made in its first Afd: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Box.net. Notably, compared to these on Alexa, its traffic is very close to meebo's and greatly surpasses the others, and is credible enough to earn the webware award from CNet. Gigabyte (talk) 06:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC) — Gigabyte (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- Strong keep. In terms of traffic, Box.net exceeds or matches (and is growing) formerly large sites such as Xdrive and Yousendit Alexa Rankings Box has had significant press recently given the announcement of their OpenBox platform and 6 million B round of funding. Box Press page
Notable Press Mentions:
Fortune The death of the desktop
AOL Money and Finance Is Microsoft threatened by Box.net? Should Google buy it?
PCWorld Store it on the web
ZDNet Buh-bye hard drive: Box.net's online storage now directly accessible by multiple Web apps
Information Week Box.net Opens Online Storage Platform To Web Services
Red Herring Box.net Gets $6M, Awaits Google's Move —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.204.153.246 (talk) 18:23, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- ...so fix it. Get rid of the pricing structure and make it sound more like an article and less like a price list. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 23:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- If the article is obviously "so-fix-it"-able, we have no reason to delete it now, right? AfD isn't Cleanup® and obiously there's a big difference between "no sources available" and "no sources presently in the article (but available)". Former is a case for AfD, latter is a matter of cleanup. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 14:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- ...so fix it. Get rid of the pricing structure and make it sound more like an article and less like a price list. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 23:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per my comment above. Seems to be more than marginally notable and is covered elsewhere. Possible merge material though... --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 14:19, 31 January 2008 (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.