Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PokerStrategy.com

: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. Courcelles 21:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

=[[PokerStrategy.com]]=

:{{la|PokerStrategy.com}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|PokerStrategy.com}})

Contested PROD: non-notable poker website that lacks reliable source coverage. Previously deleted, nothing seems to have changed since last AfD: it's still a promotional article for a non-notable website. The reasons given when contesting the PROD suffer from WP:ATA problems. —Tom Morris (talk) 18:28, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 18:28, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 18:29, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Delete - I didn't see third-party sources on Google and Yahoo. SwisterTwister talk 19:40, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Delete - This website doesn't seem to have received any commentary from reliable sources. Other than mere mentions of it's existence, there's nothing that could be used to create an article. Lord Arador (talk) 23:22, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Keep - First, I want to be open and make clear that I am working for this site. Being situated not in a big city and generally not covered well, I was rejoiced when I recently saw that some one took the time to make an article - I think a lot of players, people in the industry, potential applicants etc. have been looking for this article in vain before. // (A) Why do I think the article is relevant? - It's the by far biggest website on poker (see e.g. http://www.pokerscout.com/PokerInfoSites.aspx) and with its 5m+ members, it holds a day-to-day relevance for many people in many countries. (B) If arguing for deletion, it would be great to have some more argumentation - there are quite some sources, such as industry magazine EGRMagazine. Why exactly is this not a 'reliable source'? I deem renowned industry magazines in a market reliable. Gibralterra (talk) 15:50, 18 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.