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
Keep per consensus PeaceNT 08:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable website. No secondary sources seem to exist which verify notability. --- RockMFR 04:31, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - taking a look at the Ghits, it may meet point 3 of WP:WEB: "The content is distributed via a medium which is both well known and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster." The distribution of GayNZ.com stories by multiple other sites is enough to tip me to a keep !vote although it's hardly cast in stone. Otto4711 04:55, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:WEB. Has to meet most of the criterias of notability, not just one. --[|K.Z|] T • V • C 05:10, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Quoting from WP:WEB: "Keeping in mind that all articles must conform with our policy on verifiability using reliable sources, and that primary sources alone are not sufficient to establish notability, web-specific content are deemed notable, if they meet any one of the following criteria." (emphasis in the original) Otto4711 16:23, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Otto4711's opinion, plus countering RockMFR's assertion that it's not notable as GayNZ is NZ's largest on-line GLBT community and is referenced by NZ media as a source for the views of the GLBT community. Enzedbrit 10:15, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to be a dick, but would you mind providing links to where it is referenced by the NZ media? --- RockMFR 18:41, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Grutness. I'd have suggested www.scoop.co.nz with a searchEnzedbrit 09:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per comments above. The page is notable enough. -- Chairman S.TalkContribs 10:59, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as it appears notable. Though a secondary resource would be nice, it gets over 22,000 hits on Google. ZimmerBarnes 15:39, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notability = Pass. Dfrg.msc 21:33, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As per above. There's a lot less notable stuff than this on Wikipedia. Alun 17:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Otto4711 and the sources provided by Grutness. The website appears to be a notable NZ online community. WjBscribe 09:07, 20 February 2007 (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.