- 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 delete. (X! · talk) · @233 · 04:35, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Forkfly (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
The article does not provide any references for its assertion of notability. I was unable to find any reliable sources which would back up its claims, and I was unable to find any sources in Google News, Scholar, or Books relating to the website. [edit] additionally, the user which created the page, User:Forkflypdx, may have created the article as advertisement for the site, given the similarity of their names. Odie5533 (talk) 17:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 18:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 18:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as self-promotional advertisement. None of the 15 results for "Forkfly" "Paul Wagner" can be considered reliable or nontrivial. The mentioned quotes appear to be unverifiable. — Rankiri (talk) 18:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - no coverage in reliable sources -- Whpq (talk) 12:42, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - the entry is full of self-promotional material and I find zero reliable sources about any of the claims that were mentioned.--Christian B (talk) 23:32, 7 July 2009 (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.