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. One^{two^three...} 06:38, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sons of Sam Horn

[edit]

AfDs for this article:

not notable fan blog site Spanneraol (talk) 15:32, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as non notable Boston Red Sox fan page. Hundreds of this sort of internet sites exist, none of them deserve their own articles.Spanneraol (talk) 15:35, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Last AFD resulted in keep because of two links, one where members banded together and donated $25K or so to some charity, and one where a reporter for the Slate said he likes the web site. That's it. That hardly qualifies as "significant coverage" in my opinion. Wknight94 ^talk 15:49, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - It is merely a fan blog, it fails notability. Diana LeCrois : 17:30, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Full article on it in Slate, strong mention in CNET article, plus multiple mentions in major regional media (i.e. the Boston Globe refs).--Cube lurker (talk) 19:08, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Only certain (i.e. famous, significant coverage) blogs are notable, and this one isn't.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 19:53, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - on examination, I don't see anything that would establish enough third-party notability to make this worthy of inclusion. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 18:53, 13 May 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.