- 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 speedy keep. The revision history of Monday is enough to conclude that all three of Johnishungry (talk · contribs · checkuser · block user · block log · edit count), Pisswiggles (talk · contribs · checkuser · block user · block log · edit count), and Kemptinplickc (talk · contribs · checkuser · block user · block log · edit count) are one single person who is here purely to disrupt. The revision history of this article indicates that 74.214.108.37 (talk · contribs · checkuser · block user · block log · edit count) is that person, too. 74.214.106.9 (talk · contribs · checkuser · block user · block log · edit count) below probably is as well. This is just vandalism. Uncle G (talk) 07:22, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Newegg (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Company is not notable, and this is primarily an advertisement page Johnishungry (talk) 05:47, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I concur this article is simply blatant advertising for a company of dubious notability74.214.106.9 (talk) 05:49, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Definately advertising I recommend deletion unless valid arguments can be made suggesting the laterPisswiggles (talk) 05:53, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I didnt realize deletionism had gotten so out of hand over the last 2 years... Newegg is a very well-known company, it's revenue is in the billions, and a simple search for "newegg" on google news returns literally hundreds of news articles in the last month alone. Keep. 67.9.148.47 (talk) 06:00, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This isn't deletionism. It just vandalism from a university student with too much time on xyr hands. Uncle G (talk) 07:22, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Quack, quack socking. Not commenting on merits of the article except to say that it's been around for a year, with a large number of editors touching it, and nobody has claimed blatant advertising before. //roux 05:57, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- How dare you accuse me of socking. Google news is not a reliable defense as it pulls up random articles acording to its preprogrammed search critea. This page is definitely and advertisement and deserves to be deleted.Pisswiggles (talk) 06:05, 15 December 2008 (UTC)Delete[reply]
- Comment - For what it's worth, the nominator also doesn't like Mondays. --Bongwarrior (talk) 06:08, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Newegg is pretty well-known company that has been around for a few years. No reason, really, to delete this article. SMSpivey (talk) 06:22, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The same nominator proposed Monday for deletion. ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:47, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep. Newegg easily meets the notability requirements for organizations and companies. LinguistAtLarge 07:10, 15 December 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.