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. postdlf (talk) 23:28, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WebBiographies[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Relisting: this is about a minor blogging site which was started by a notable figure in the internet world in 2006 but generated little or no income and had very little activity after 2010 except for a few entries in 2011. The website has been up for sale for at least 6 months and maybe more. There were discussions about deletion in 2007 and 2012 but no consensus. Now there isn't even a website. Chris55 (talk) 18:54, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: not a notable company even when it existed. I'm going to be lazy (expedient?) and just quote Starblind from the 2nd nomination: "While it being defunct isn't necessarily an issue, as far as I can tell it never really got off the ground at all. The original AFD says it had an "alexa rank over 100,000 for 5 months" even in its heyday, and it seems to have been one of countless thousands of forgotten contenders in the 'let's make another Myspace' gold rush of the mid-2000s." Also, amusing quote from the website's creator in the MIT ref: "...at that point we seal your biography and it's never deleted, and is stored free or charge.". —Noah 19:02, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 19:05, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'm the creator of this article, but I don't think it stands up to current notability guidelines Shii (tock) 22:33, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:26, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Another startup that got a decent amount of publicy around launch time, and some further coverage, and never made it. Like many others. Very few do. I've been argued down in the past for !voting to delete startups that were less successful than this one, under WP:NTEMP. If someone could do the research and find the "going out business" notice and what happened to the biographies, and updated the article to reflect that, I would !vote to keep it. – Margin1522 (talk) 19:29, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 07:41, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a few brief mentions in genealogy books, but not significant coverage. Nwlaw63 (talk) 05:51, 16 February 2015 (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.