- 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. --Ezeu 05:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This appears to be wholly non notable. A local web design firm that is simply showcasing its work here and using WP as an advert. Cute name. Gave me paws for thought. But a cute name does not mean it makes the cut Fiddle Faddle 14:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 15:25, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete purr nom. NawlinWiki 15:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete just advertising Optimale Gu 16:05, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, fails WP:ADS and WP:WEB. --Coredesat talk 21:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as failing WP:WEB. TedTalk/Contributions 01:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment A whole raft of new "external references" have ben added to the site. As far as I can see they are links to all the various linkfarms that webmasters use for search engine optimisation, and that search engines probably ignore. In many ways this proves that the article's creator is just using WP as a link farm. Fiddle Faddle 06:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I am the author of this article and have been revising it according to your inputs. It is unclear to me how this article fails WP:ADS and WP:WEB. I've referenced products that the company has developed and have cited an article from the Boston Globe which lists the company in its efforts to support a local humane society. I aslo have recently added additional external links to increase the company's credibility, but Fiddle Faddle's comments are well taken and I will delete the non-trivial references. Any further input would greatly be appreciated. Thank you. --Wolf 06:52, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I have dropped a note on this to User talk:Wolf grey which others also might like to add to to assist the efforts in making the article potentially keepable. The essence is that wikipedia needs "heavyweight" external "stuff" to assert notability. Fiddle Faddle 07:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment the American Association of Webmasters and the 2005 award may be just sufficient to assert notability. I will have a further look at these and revise my nomination if I feel they make enough of a case Fiddle Faddle 07:15, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The Design Firms award appears to be an award which causes people to click to their (Designfirms) website and see 4 google adsense adverts. I am discounting that award as simply an award to make money for designfirms (that was 2005). The AA of W award (2006) has more substance in but it is also a direct moneyspinner for AA of W with banner adverts, so I regret I am discounting that as well. I wish I saw enough here to change my mind. Fiddle Faddle 07:27, 3 July 2006 (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.