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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:58, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BestEverAlbums.com[edit]

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

I found no notability per WP:WEB. SL93 (talk) 22:27, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete This violates WP:ADVERT. It's an advertisement for a website. NJ Wine (talk) 01:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's non-notable, but it doesn't have any advertising language. It just reads like an article even though it is non-notable. SL93 (talk) 22:41, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article states: In addition to creating greatest album charts (any of which can be exported to CSV files, or be subscribed to via RSS feeds), members can also create personal lists of favourite albums, participate on the forums, track their music collections and assign comments or ratings. That sounds like an advertising promotion to me. NJ Wine 01:01, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

It sounds like a description of the website to me. SL93 (talk) 01:02, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 12:07, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 12:07, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Cool site but I'm unable to find anything to suggest it meets WP:WEB. Gongshow ^Talk 21:59, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, cool site, and at least as notable as the other music websites listed on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Music_websites (Traffic stats for BestEverAlbums here: https://www.quantcast.com/besteveralbums.com ). In no way does the article page sound like an advert, it's just a description of the features. 80.91.67.37 (talk) 14:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, →TheSpecialUser^Talk_{Contributions}* 04:26, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:18, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — 80.91.67.37 (talk) 11:41, 23 May 2012 (UTC) It's a notable site within its niche. You could maybe compare it to GameRankings, RateYourMusic & sites like that.[reply]
Delete. Fails to establish notability per WP:WEB. The only sources aside from Alexa (which itself is not a reliable source) is the site itself. Rorshacma (talk) 16:39, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — 92.21.183.2 (talk) 18:08, 24 May 2012 (UTC) Agree with a previous poster. If you look at the websites in the Music Websites category, BestEverAlbums is as at least as notable as most of them (& more so in many cases). Yes, ignore the Alexa stats as they are unreliable, but a previous poster linked to the QuantCast stats which are much more accurate.[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.