Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Web-Based Content

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 Web content. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:57, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Web-Based Content

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

WP:DICDEF, and not even a good one (title spelling, and not everything on the interwebs needs to be entertaining). QVVERTYVS (hm?) 19:50, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DeleteIn agreement with the nominator's concerns. And Adoil Descended (talk) 20:01, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yea hey I made the article, And While its true not everything has to be entertaining, But do't go calling a new wikipedians articles bad--Koy Hoffman (talk) 20:57, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:20, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. Web content already exists. It's sufficiently realistic that a user might query "Web-Based Content". —Largo Plazo (talk) 23:44, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. As what Largoplazo said, no need to delete as another article has an existing topic. ///EuroCarGT 01:11, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Web content. This is a valid search term but the topic has already been treated elsewhere on Wikipedia. De728631 (talk) 14:57, 2 October 2013 (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.