- 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 redirect to Facebook, given that it has been pointed out that much of the content here is also in that article. Feel free to merge any additional content necessary. --Coredesat 04:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural nomination to fix a malformed AfD ElKevbo 16:06, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
-From the discussion page-
This article should be deleted since the website ConnectU is not a known project. Its rating is very low and this website is only known because of its connection with Facebook. As we may see from the reference section that it only lists articles about lawsuits by ConnectU against Facebook and in my opinion that is not enough. The website must have a notability of its own and I think this is not the case with ConnectU. Northern 11:13, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ConnectU is in fact a notable and known project. Its development of a university-wide social network specific to school institutions was the first of its kind. It is also inextricably linked to and a catalyst for web 2.0, niche social networks, and Facebook.
What is grounds for inclusion into Wikipedia is not the relative success or rank of a given website or company, which is of course in the case of ConnectU clouded by allegations of missapropriation, but rather the relative impact and notability of that said entity. comment added by Ashellray (talk • contribs) 22:08, August 24, 2007 (UTC)
- Merge into Facebook (although much of it already appears to be in that article). --ElKevbo 16:08, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletions. -- the wub "?!" 18:38, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep plenty of coverage found. Do NOT merge into facebook. They're 2 separate competing entities Corpx 19:44, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Most of that coverage either seems to focus on the lawsuit or a quick mention of ConnectU as part of a roundup of social networking sites (and even those articles seem to focus much more on Facebook). --ElKevbo 20:06, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep great importance as a precursor , in its own right. That is led to something else, does not make it less notable. Ashellray has it right. DGG (talk) 05:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This article has hardly any information about the website. --Heero Kirashami 23:30, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This website can not be notable for one small reason: its Alexa rating is 81,253 which is VERY low. My website which I never advertised or promoted was like 300,000 so anything around 100,000 can't be notable.
And as already stated by me and the other person, all references about this website (or at least the ones that were included) are only about the lawsuit. It is a website, and therefore if it's not a known website, it can't have an article on Wikipedia.
Just because the creator of the website filled a lawsuit does not make this website famous. Why don't we write about each and every person who sued myspace, then?
Again, this website's ONLY fame is through Facebook.
Northern 18:24, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge any notable resulting controversy from the suit at Facebook. Italiavivi 19:48, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete and tell Winklevoss ScrewU for suing facebook.--66.28.244.143 20:28, 30 August 2007 (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.