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. — Nearly Headless Nick ^{C} 13:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ticket4one[edit]

Dating website which claims to be "Largest and most popular English-language Singles Events website in the world", which is why I bumped this from speedy A7. However this claim is unsourced and may be original research per the talk page. Kimchi.sg 03:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This research is original as i am writting a paper for my university on singles events and speed dating. you will note that i have also edited a couple of other pages on wiki in relation to the origins and legal complications of speed dating and singles events.

My research has led me to search through msn, yahoo and google the three major search engines on the internet all of which have confirmed that ticket4one is the largest online both in bandwidth / indexed pages and viewable members.

i have spent a lot of time researching this industry so far and have found no other website to contradict my research.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocky4885 (talk • contribs)

Be aware that using original research to make articles is forbidden here. If no other sources state the same claims as in this article it will have to be deleted. Kimchi.sg 04:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok so i have removed the title "largest in the world" to comprimise with wiki standards. However i have left the stats on the article for further researchers to establish their own conclusion.

Is this sufficiant ?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocky4885 (talk • contribs)

If you remove that part then the article doesn't assert the notability of the website, which makes it delete-worthy as well. Kimchi.sg 04:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete ticket4one gets 126 ghits. For an online dating website, that's death. NN. Josh Parris 04:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Josh but ticket4one is not a dating site or they would be listed with DATING SITES. This is relation to Singles Events! PLEASE NOTE THE DIFFERENCE IN SPELLING

Either way it's a website. A non-notable one. Changing the description doesn't change the fact it's a website. Kimchi.sg 04:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Either way it may not be notable to you, But clearly the amount of members in the first nine months makes it notable for someone else.Compared to the numbers indicated for members in the social networking website list Dont you think ?

As for it being a website "a non notable one" does that mean seeing as though you want to compare numbers that we should go and delete sites such as advogato, babbello, consumating, studybreakers,vietspace and zaadz from wikipedia ?

After all the term " social networking site" is searched 50 -60 times greater then that of the term " Singles Events yet the memberships of these sites is as you like to put it "death"

Strong Delete This appears to be a personal issue for the creator, as evinced by his commentary on my user page wherein he admits that this is all original research anyway. 209.30.160.174 05:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE NOTE ARTICLE HAS BEEN ALTERED SINCE THIS ISSUE TO COMPLY WITH WIKI In relation to being a personal issue i believe all researchers, strive to have their work published. Otherwise our work is rendered useless

Delete. Still no indication that this satisfies our wp:notability requirements. — coelacan talk — 05:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Google Search " Ticket4one articles " i have 2280 results found

Also Salt this and ticket4one.com, persistent recreations of deleted content.[1] [2] — coelacan talk — 06:46, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately this seems to have become a bullying war.... The only content that has been recreated has been to adhere to wikipedia guidlines / requests

Well then I request that you read our Wikipedia:Notability guideline (actually a policy, non-negotiable) and demonstrate how your website meets the notability requirements, using WP:Reliable Sources. Google hits are not reliable sources, and just for the record, 2280 google hits is a very small number anyway. — coelacan talk — 07:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

for a start it is NOT my website. secondly it is not "2280 hits" they are press releaase/news articles.As i mentioned earlier to compare these results to our social networking list the following can be seen. ticket4one 2280 articles babbello 974 articles studybreakers 918 vietspace 1040

I believe 2280 is no longer a "very" small number when compared to other wikipedia content.

You need to fulfill WP:N using third party WP:RS, cited within the article, or your article will be deleted. I'm just explaining this to you. I've explained it enough. I'm done. Your article will be deleted in five days. — coelacan talk — 07:35, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I feel bad for Rocky, who's fighting an uphill battle, but I don't think there's much he can do to prove the notability of Ticket4one. It's just not there. YechielMan 07:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: What is something that looks like pork, smells like pork, and tastes like pork?? There's a pretty good chance it's pork. I somehow don't think we should feel sorry for Rocky4885. From his review of the site, and the one-liners he's been posting on blinklist and blog.myspace.com/rocky4885, it seems he has had a good time doing his "original research" ;-), or there may be a conflict of interest. Ohconfucius 01:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I already deleted it once as spam. It gets fewer Google hits than I do. It has not been the primary focus of non-trivial coverage in reliable secondary sources. Guy (Help!) 11:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no reliable sources provided, and googling finds onliny links, and press releases. -- Whpq 16:55, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Let's compare Alexa traffic rankings here: 8minutedating.com - #203,367; hurrydate.com - #141,397; offlinespeeddating.com (a service for Jewish singles) - #1,181,375; ticket4one.com - #1,792,272. Admittedly, it used to be higher - their traffic has dropped 43% in the last 3 months, according to Alexa. Basically, this is NO WAY the largest or most popular speed dating site. OUT!!! --Brianyoumans 20:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May i point out that the article does state " it may not have the highest amount of unique visitors.

In regards to 8minutedating, hurrydate, offlinespeeddating only one of these websites seems to have members profiles being hurrydate, To which anyone of you can compare the search results to ticket4one. It seems Ticket4one actually has approx 3 times the amount of members. (which is what the article is stating)

wow sounds like rocky4885 has rubbed some people the wrong way. or do you just have invested interests within that industry?

i have read ALL the facts submitted by rocky4885 " (which i strongly suggest some of you do) in discussion and talks all of which i cannot help but find the exact results to which this article proclaims are true. Perhaps all we need here is an edit of this article. For if we delete this article, then i can without a doubt see room for deletion on numerous websites contained within our own social networking website list— Rattlenhum (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Delete and salt per comments above: Persistent attempts at re-creating articles deleted per failing WP:WEB and WP:SPAM. Ohconfucius 02:29, 13 February 2007 (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.