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) 08:54, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Searchking[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article fails WP:NOTABILITY, WP:CORP. Article was created by an WP:SPA account with no other edits other than related to Searchking SEO. Was speedied previously under spam article SearchKing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), as WP:CSD#A7 and WP:CSD#G11 (advertising and promotion). Self-promotion and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopaedia article. Hu12 (talk) 15:06, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete even if it was cleaned up, there's no notability there. Alexa rank is 261,645. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:23, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Olive, I has been searchking and searchking and I can't find that itsk notable. Popeye the Sailor Man 18:42, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:CORP. Yet another search optimization advert is not the start of a useful article. Johnuniq (talk) 04:05, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is the first article I've seen today that is kind of dumb (and the last article I saw was Bacon on the Simpsons episodes!) This is a poor attempt at using SEO on Wikipedia. No notability to speak of. I hope this isn't a central part of their SEO strategy! DRosin (talk) 21:44, 20 December 2009 (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.