Knowledge

:Articles for deletion/Grouply - Knowledge

Source 📝

128:
Despite controversies on mailing lists and blogs, Grouply does not appear to be notable. Another editor and myself have both done some searching and nothing turns up from reliable sources (eg Wired magazine has nothing on it). Even Grouply's supporters don't seem to have been able to find anything.
217:
I see you've added two more blogs. I'm not sure they qualify as RS anywhere, certainly not evidence of notability. What makes TechChrunch more important than Wired? I note that you are the article's creator (and have every right to comment here, but the fact seems relevant)
199:
Contrary to above assertions there are several important citations including TechCrunch, which with startups is more relevant than Wired. Whilst the Alexa stats are not high, it does show more Grouply has doubled its traffic in the last month.
253:
Grouply seems to be invading Yahoo! groups, and there is a big argument if this is trojan spam or something with which Yahoo! is partnering, as its e-mails claim.--01:52, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
121: 151:. You know an article is in trouble when almost every "source" is actually just the subject's own blog. I also note an Alexa rank of 17: 88: 83: 92: 244: 36: 243:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
75: 35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
53: 155:, which is really weak especially for social networking (for comparison's sake, Myspace is ranked 7). 223: 205: 134: 187: 227: 209: 191: 174: 138: 79: 57: 152: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
71: 63: 219: 201: 130: 183: 156: 148: 109: 49: 237:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
116: 105: 101: 97: 39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 247:). No further edits should be made to this page. 8: 7: 24: 18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion 210:00:30, 01 September 2008 (UTC) 1: 228:08:19, 1 September 2008 (UTC) 58:14:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC) 192:16:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC) 175:13:55, 26 August 2008 (UTC) 139:13:38, 26 August 2008 (UTC) 267: 240:Please do not modify it. 32:Please do not modify it. 44:The result was 258: 242: 172: 169: 166: 163: 119: 113: 95: 34: 266: 265: 261: 260: 259: 257: 256: 255: 251: 245:deletion review 238: 182:per nominator. 170: 167: 164: 161: 115: 86: 70: 67: 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 264: 262: 250: 249: 233: 232: 231: 230: 194: 177: 157:Andrew Lenahan 126: 125: 66: 61: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 263: 254: 248: 246: 241: 235: 234: 229: 225: 221: 216: 213: 212: 211: 207: 203: 198: 195: 193: 189: 185: 181: 178: 176: 173: 158: 154: 150: 146: 143: 142: 141: 140: 136: 132: 123: 118: 111: 107: 103: 99: 94: 90: 85: 81: 77: 73: 69: 68: 65: 62: 60: 59: 55: 51: 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 252: 239: 236: 214: 196: 179: 160: 144: 127: 45: 43: 31: 28: 220:Doug Weller 131:Doug Weller 202:Andyswarbs 184:Thryduulf 153:#49,735th 122:View log 215:Comment 149:WP:CORP 89:protect 84:history 72:Grouply 64:Grouply 180:Delete 145:Delete 117:delete 93:delete 50:Stifle 46:Delete 120:) – ( 110:views 102:watch 98:links 16:< 224:talk 206:talk 197:Keep 188:talk 147:per 135:talk 106:logs 80:talk 76:edit 54:talk 168:bli 226:) 208:) 190:) 171:nd 165:ar 162:St 159:- 137:) 108:| 104:| 100:| 96:| 91:| 87:| 82:| 78:| 56:) 48:. 222:( 204:( 186:( 133:( 124:) 114:( 112:) 74:( 52:(

Index

Knowledge:Articles for deletion
deletion review
Stifle
talk
14:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Grouply
Grouply
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
delete
View log
Doug Weller
talk
13:38, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
WP:CORP
#49,735th
Andrew Lenahan
13:55, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Thryduulf
talk
16:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Andyswarbs
talk

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.