205:"any and all facebook groups, myspace groups, yahoo groups, friendster groups, msn groups, orkut groups, etc" - this is nonsense. Any group that is notable should of course be kept, simply because something comes from a social website does not in any way mean it is of 'less value' than a non-social website. This is an obvious speedy keep, apart from the fact 400,000 people are in this group, there are a number of google results, proving that it is notable.
190:
of people are part of a group, does that not at least give a group notoriety? While every group with 1,000,000 members may not deserve an article, neither do the many lists and collections of loosely associated articles. I think that a policy page dealing strictly with creation of "list" and
185:
The article is well-sourced, and fairly well written. Given the frequency of AfD noms for list and organisation-related articles, I wonder if a review is needed about the notability of user "groups" in general. If
120:
93:
88:
97:
17:
80:
242:
36:
241:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
156:
any and all facebook groups, myspace groups, yahoo groups, friendster groups, msn groups, orkut groups, etc
227:
209:
195:
175:
148:
135:
62:
220:
84:
191:"collection" style articles may be necessary, to reduce the number of AfD nominations produced daily.--
58:
76:
68:
206:
192:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
55:
48:, not to question the site's motives, only it's notability as a Knowledge article. Fails
127:
Facebook groups, even large ones, are not notable. The references provided are not from
224:
157:
132:
49:
128:
114:
145:
235:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
219:- This clearly doesn't fall under any of the criteria for
110:
106:
102:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
245:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
7:
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
54:May the Force be with you!
262:
228:15:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
210:14:58, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
196:00:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
176:14:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
149:10:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
136:10:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
63:12:28, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
238:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
253:
240:
173:
170:
167:
164:
129:reliable sources
118:
100:
61:
34:
261:
260:
256:
255:
254:
252:
251:
250:
249:
243:deletion review
236:
171:
168:
165:
162:
91:
75:
72:
53:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
259:
257:
248:
247:
231:
230:
221:speedy keeping
213:
212:
199:
198:
179:
178:
158:Andrew Lenahan
151:
125:
124:
71:
66:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
258:
246:
244:
239:
233:
232:
229:
226:
222:
218:
215:
214:
211:
208:
204:
201:
200:
197:
194:
189:
184:
181:
180:
177:
174:
159:
155:
152:
150:
147:
143:
140:
139:
138:
137:
134:
130:
122:
116:
112:
108:
104:
99:
95:
90:
86:
82:
78:
77:400,000 Faces
74:
73:
70:
69:400,000 Faces
67:
65:
64:
60:
57:
52:criterion. --
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
237:
234:
216:
207:Thedreamdied
202:
193:Lostcause365
187:
182:
161:
153:
141:
126:
45:
43:
31:
28:
203:Strong Keep
225:DWaterson
144:per nom.
133:DWaterson
188:millions
121:View log
217:Comment
94:protect
89:history
154:Delete
142:Delete
98:delete
59:shth91
50:WP:WEB
46:Delete
146:MER-C
115:views
107:watch
103:links
16:<
183:Keep
111:logs
85:talk
81:edit
56:Shre
169:bli
119:– (
223:.
172:nd
166:ar
163:St
160:-
131:.
113:|
109:|
105:|
101:|
96:|
92:|
87:|
83:|
123:)
117:)
79:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.