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 No consensus. Maxim_(talk) 14:27, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Office Pirates[edit]

Procedural nom; I've deprodded this since - as it has at least one significant reference (from Media Week) and was owned by the decidedly notable Time, Inc and not a two-guys-in-a-basement operation, this may warrant keeping; however I'm not certain we really need to keep articles on defunct websites, even those run by major corporations. Procedural nom so I abstain — iridescent (talk to me!) 19:01, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:WEB. The article doesn't really claim any notability besides being owned by a major company--which itself owns many websites, large and small, and thus I don't see any notability really being inherited. Chasingliberty.com, for example, is also owned by Warner Brothers and is about as non-notable a site as you'll ever see. The article is mostly about the website getting shut down, and the Media Week link just leads to a server error. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 21:37, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Arrr! tis notable indeed, matey! Billgordon1099 03:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep under WP:WEB criterion #1, multiple reliable sources about it. Bondegezou 15:50, 20 September 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.