Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chrome Web Store

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. (non-admin closure) — ΛΧΣ21™ 22:11, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chrome Web Store (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

While this article is well referenced it has no merit as a Wikipedia article and is a good example of systemic bias - in this case towards computer and internet related articles. It is also a sort of spam and gives Google a commercial advantage over competitors (because of the popularity of Wikipedia). -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 06:13, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - article has coverage in multiple reliable sources so meets WP:GNG. Nominator's reason for deletion seems to be a textbook WP:IDONTLIKEIT. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 07:02, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and suggest a withdrawal by the nominator. Per sources in the article, this topic meets WP:GNG. Till 13:48, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep - The nomination makes no case that the subject is not notable. Subject passes WP:GNG. -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 14:58, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The Chrome Web Store would be as significant and notable as the Apple App Store. Additionally, considering that this is Google, it would certainly gain significant coverage and it has. As for the "It is also a sort of spam" comment, there are far worse articles that read like advertisements. SwisterTwister talk 22:49, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy and Snow Keep - No valid deletion rationale has been presented. See also WP:DEL-REASON. Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:55, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:21, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Keep No proper reason to delete. It is very much notable --Anbu121 (talk me) 12:33, 18 October 2012 (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.