- 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 delete as non-notable. - ulayiti (talk) 12:04, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable site 12.22.157.254 17:29, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, non-notable blogging site.--Isotope23 17:46, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Non-notable. *drew 05:05, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment As the creator of this site, a vote by me would be considered fancruft, so I'm not voting. However, I'd like to present some information about Diary-X that is relevant to this vote. Diary-X has a total of 117,467 users, of which approximately 7,269 are active. Only 35% of them are listed in the members directory (which is opt-in only). Diary-X has been online since August 2000, and has recieved mention (although not in an article focused on Diary-X) in Newsweek and Time magazines. The forums have approximately 4,818 members, although technically all Diary-X members are allowed to contribute to the forums. Our Alexa ranking is 29,249, and Google results are misleading because Google has only recently lifted an internal ban on the diary-x.com ___domain. This of course all boils down to not meeting the requirements for website notability, but only just barely. Thanks. Stephen Deken 17:42, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I've rewritten the page to reflect some of the notability of the site. Obviously if a vote by me is not conisdered to be fancruft, then I vote Keep. -- Stephen Deken 22:42, 7 November 2005 (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.