Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homescape

: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. MBisanz ^talk 04:30, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

=[[Homescape]]=

:{{la|Homescape}} ([{{fullurl:Homescape|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homescape}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Website seems to have no notability other than being part of an ad network owned by a group of large newspaper chains. There is no news coverage -- significant or otherwise -- that meets WP:INTERNET. Flowanda | Talk 12:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Delete per nomination. The single reference provided links to a pay site apparently targeted at real estate brokers, and as such may not be a reliable source and at any rate is difficult to evaluate. A non-notable, non-consumer business unlikely to be much noticed in general interest publications. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:08, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 22:10, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:09, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I would like to see further evidence of notability on this topic. Homescape reference may be self-promotional, or a COI. Recommend additional notable content, and external references to 'newsworthy' information about Homescape. 67.83.85.236 (talk) 22:29, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

* Delete. One article from a periodical is way below notability standards. Difficult to tell if there is any evidence of notability on Google because there are a lot of other things called Homescape, but this AfD has been around for days, and if no-one prepared to supply evidence of notabiltiy, I don't see any point in keeping this. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 20:09, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Delete: Fails WP:WEB. Schuym1 (talk) 20:29, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Weak Keep / Rename - As of last week, this company appears to have changed its name to HomeFinder and there were a number of articles around this change. This appears to be a press release that got picked up with articles. Given this I think notability could potentially be established. |► ϋrbanяenewaℓ • TALK ◄| 18:14, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Comment. I've had a better look at this article now. It appears this was originally written by an single-purpose editor who has since left in horrible marketing jargon. After the editor left, all the marketing jargon was stripped out. As a result, we're now left with an article that doesn't really say much at all. However, I've now had a look at the scale of the business, and I think there's a reasonable chance of establishing notability. As a result, I suggest Keep if someone is prepared to change this into a worthwhile article, or Merge to its parent company's article if not. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 19:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Comment. I've added some additional references and content. The article is still fundamentally a stub but I would reiterate a Keep and then Rename to Homefinder.com |► ϋrбanяeneωaℓ • TALK ◄| 22:27, 20 January 2009 (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.