Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HomeSav

: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. — Cirt (talk) 18:02, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

=[[HomeSav]]=

:{{la|HomeSav}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|HomeSav}})

Article was created by, and has been subject to editing by a sock puppet [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Wiki_User48&curid=32651818&diff=443686611&oldid=443270635]. It was speedy nominated, and then the speedy was removed by an anon IP account. It was then prodded, and deprodded by the same anon IP account without any improvements to the article by the anon IP, so we are at AfD with the same reasoning as the Prod. It appears to fail WP:ORG. I found one detailed coverage article in CJnews. But that does not appear to amount to significant coverage. It appears too early for such an article. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:02, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 15:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Delete per lack of enough notable mentions that could help this on a encyclopedia. I found this [http://www.blogto.com/fashion_style/2010/11/is_homesav_the_groupon_for_home_decor/ mention] but it isn't enough, and I didn't see anything on both Yahoo, Google, and Google News. SwisterTwister talk 05:31, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 15:04, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Delete Little indication of wp:notabiliity, and this appears to be a case where someone already worked that aspect to the max. The three references include: One article in a specialty web site, one in a blog section of a web site, and on couple-paragraph mention on a web site article that was listing companies of that type. North8000 (talk) 16:45, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

: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.