This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:38, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki dating[edit]

Why was this put on VfD? I mean, almost all Wiki projects have articles in Wikipedia. Despite low google hits, it has a high alexa ranking.

• Keep per alexa ranking. --SuperDude 02:37, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• The alexa rating I get is a very unremarkable figure in the 500,000 range. Is this "high"? Morwen - Talk 08:14, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • A higher (in numeric value) Alexa ranking means less traffic. For comparison, Slashdot, a high-traffic site, has a 1,380 ranking. android79 11:55, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
    • In music charts, #1 is the highest. Alexa rankings also work this way. This site obviously has a very low ranking.
      • It's not 500,000, it's 5,500,000. It's difficult to find anything lower than that. Angela. 00:58, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

Delete apparent vanity, wikipedia is not a web directory. Morwen - Talk 14:15, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, but probably needs cleanup. --User:Merovingian (t) (c) 08:45, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Non-notable website. Started a month and a half ago and has an abysmal Alexa ranking. android79 11:55, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as per android. --Uppland 14:42, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: as Cabhan points out it has only eight members. Of these six live in Florida, one in Georgia and one has nothing but a question mark on his/her userpage. Started in June 2005. Really, really bad Alexa ranking. This website is almost as notable as my coffee mug. Uppland 16:14, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: It has 8 registered users. Alexa rating of 5,532,733. *attacks site with karate ninja-chucks* -- CABHAN TALK CONTRIBS 15:02, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I just created my own account for Wiki dating. I think it has a potential for being notable and having alot of users! --SuperDude 21:46, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. --Scimitar ^parley 15:17, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep seems notable. Howabout1 ^{Talk to me!} 15:21, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Let's see. Very poor Alexa ranking, no assertion of notability, less than two months old... Furthermore, it is an external website with no affiliation to wikipedia (other than being a wiki, of which there are a huge number), not a true wikiproject. --Icelight 16:47, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
• delete! soooo non-notable, despite what the nominator claims. (?) Brighterorange 17:57, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Only 2719 page views, across the entire site? Hardly worth an article. --Carnildo 19:53, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- it's a one month old wiki web site. Installing and configuring Mediawiki should not equal an instant Wikipedia article. If the site proves popular, it'll be recreated with outside references pointing out it's popularity. - Longhair | Talk 21:33, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Wikipedia is not a web directory. It's not even a wiki directory. Gentgeen 22:23, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Alexa ranking below 5 million. There are hundreds of Wikicities more active than this and those don't have articles. Article was created by SuperDude115, who is a sockpuppet of SamuraiClinton who keeps requesting this wiki be a Wikicity. Angela. 00:58, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete for non-notability above and beyond the call of duty. Nandesuka 22:38, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I vote myself for deletion!

• My friend Ben, whose been helping me with the site, left me an odd notice today: the Wikipedia article on "WikiDating" is being deleted. I am flattered someone thought it was worth mentioning, but it still is very new, and when 1.5 MediaWiki stablizes, I plan to upgrade & haven't decided yet if its worth borging in a bunch of age code vs. just asking people to be honest: and of course, there's still the issue of deletions there and the like. Right now, its still very much an experiment & the best support I could ask would be word-of-mouth: instead of provoking the pro-deletion factions I've been made aware of that defend this site. This didn't need to be added to their list: maybe in a few years, if I still run it, it'll be "worthy" of even their support to mention here.

I did not submit this article, nor desired to, and with amusement & regret I vote for deletion. Cwolfsheep 23:18, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, advertising, nonnotable. tregoweth 00:00, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, advertising, not notable. --Sleepyhead81 19:16, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Wikisex forever!  Grue  19:14, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, Spam --Patio 03:33, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - not notable / advert - Tεxτurε 19:19, 3 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.