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) 11:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IZEA[edit]

IZEA (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

No real notability given. Pretty spammy; the "business units" section make it pretty clear that this was written by an insider. Most of the refs come from the izea.com home page. I declined a speedy nomination in order to get some input from the community. Tan | 39 15:29, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, no coverage in third-party sources as far as I can discern. Stifle (talk) 16:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Time to cut the spam. Ecoleetage (talk) 17:11, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Normally, I would say merge to the article on the PayPerPost subsidiary, but there's no encyclopedic information in this article about the parent company IZEA. VG ☎ 20:03, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- raven1977 (talk) 02:24, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - the combination of lack of sources and lack of meaningful content means it's not ready for prime time. I checked every single cite and even did some googling and all I could find are: (1) blog-style tech coverage including a blog that calls itself a "journal" (as opposed to professional operations that are called blogs but are really newspapers, with paid staff and editorial supervision); (2) press releases and material self-published by the company; and (3) citations to reliable sources that mentioned affiliate companies but not the subject of this article. You would think that any dot com startup in Draper Fisher's portfolio with $10M funding would get enough coverage to be notable, but in this case it does not seem to be there. Mabye it's on the verge of notability. Within a year things may be different. Payperpost, one of the family of companies, seems to be notable and has its own article, and the founder Ted Murphy may or may not be notable in his own right. So I would put this on ice for now, save the infobox and funding stats somewhere off wikipedia, and try again if the company becomes more prominent. Wikidemon (talk) 22:54, 24 October 2008 (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.