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. None of the keep comments are in any way compatible with WP:GNG or WP:Notability (web). Someone famous blogging about it doesn't make it notable. Nor does a single article with a few sentences in one newspaper make it notable. Now, it seems like some day it may meet our guidelines, so if someone wants a copy for your userspace, please let me know and I will make one for you if you want to keep working on it. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:18, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Supertova[edit]

Supertova (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Created by the site owner making it a big COI problem and just doesn't seem to be all that notable. Eeekster (talk) 19:38, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:34, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Another reference here Aha... (talk) 05:09, 24 September 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwisha (talk • contribs) [reply]
This link contains wrong information. The updated and real reference is Updated reference — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albakiulmaruf (talk • contribs) 04:07, 26 September 2012 (UTC) — Albakiulmaruf (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
The Jewish Light article has three sentences on Supertova, two of which are copy taken directly from the company website. That violates WP:Independent.
The Matthew Hartmann, Luke Ford, and HaBitza blogs are not from "published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." WP:BLOGS
The Jewpro.co.uk source is a blog and it is a simply a company directory listing, without original, verifiable third party content.
The Indiana Daily Student and Jewish State articles were based on promotional activity and press releases by the company. According to WP:N:

No subject is automatically or inherently notable merely because it exists: The evidence must show the topic has gained significant independent coverage or recognition, and that this was not a mere short-term interest, nor a result of promotional activity[...]The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the topic itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, author, inventor, or vendor) have actually considered the topic notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it – without incentive, promotion, or other influence by people connected to the topic matter.

The link to Newsvine is bad -- the website reports "There doesn't seem to be a page here anymore." A search of Newsvine for supertova yielded "No results."
In addition, a Google News Archives search for "supertova" yields on a single match -- a press release. Other searches show an absence of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". (WP:N)
As Eeekster pointed out, the article was added by the company owner.

If [...] you expect to derive monetary or other benefits or considerations from editing Wikipedia; for example, by being an owner, officer, or other stakeholder of a company or other organization about which you are writing; then you are very strongly discouraged to edit Wikipedia in areas where there is a conflict of interest that may make your edits non-neutral (biased).[...] If you have a financial interest in a topic (either as an employee, owner or other stakeholder) it is advised to provide full disclosure of your connection, and to use the "discussion" pages to suggest changes (using the {Request edit} template to request edits) rather than editing articles directly. (WP:NOPAY)

Finally, WP:NTEMP: Notability is not temporary. There is no string of time-spaced coverage of this company by WP:RELIABLE sources.
Once the company has done something noteworthy and has achieved coverage based on its actions, it should come back and create an article, following the WP:NOPAY guidelines. Infoman99 (talk) 00:42, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
no possible way Indiana University is looking to promote a non-notable website, its ludicrous to even draw up some conclusion that Indiana University is sparking news about something as a 'promotional' means. Very bizarre to draw such conclusion. references reference1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albakiulmaruf (talk • contribs) 03:49, 26 September 2012 (UTC) — Albakiulmaruf (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Luke Ford blogged about himself joining Supertova.com. He is a well known writer, very popular, and made a name for himself. He is also featured in Wikipedia as a 'notable' person. Do you really think someone like Luke Ford would blog about himself joining Supertova if it wasnt 'Notable'???? To even argue the validity of Luke Ford, and his blog is absurd, immature, and trivial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkhabib (talk • contribs) 08:26, 26 September 2012 (UTC) — Mkhabib (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Notability is not inherited. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:12, 29 September 2012 (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.
More