Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhookh.com
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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. Consensus is that there is insufficient evidence of notability.Kubigula (talk) 16:30, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Bhookh.com (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not notable per WP:Notability (web) S Q 14:13, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 February 15. Snotbot t • c » 14:29, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:33, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:33, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. This article is about an Indian click-to-donate site which is operated by Mumbai based Vikas Sutaria. It provides a cup of staple food for every unique click (per day) of the donate button. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:34, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah so? We're talking here about the notability of website. --Saqib Qayyum (talk) 16:01, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It was not obvious in the long list of today's AfDs what the subject of the article was. Now it is. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:03, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh okay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saqib Qayyum (talk • contribs) 16:09, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It was not obvious in the long list of today's AfDs what the subject of the article was. Now it is. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:03, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah so? We're talking here about the notability of website. --Saqib Qayyum (talk) 16:01, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - The only reliable source I can find is this, which dedicates on paragraph to the website; I am not convinced that established notability. Certainly a good cause, but not notable. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 16:27, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, weakly. The Times of India article mentioned by ItsZippy (referenced in the article) and this article[1] which I think is in Tamil, are the only independent sources found by Google News. I can't evaluate whether the Tamil article is independent or significant coverage. Other sources may exist in non-Latin scripts. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:35, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep As the creator of the article. AFAIK, it is the only Indian Click to Donate website. I haven't found any other ones. As for the Tamil link, why isn't it notable? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:38, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- This statement doesn't make any sense if bhookh.com is the only Indian Click to Donate website or first and one of the earlier. Fyi, there are still couple of click to donate kinda website operating from India, one I found is http://donate1click.com/. It seems that you've any connection with bhookh.com. --S Q 13:01, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge: There are few more articles in Category:Click-to-donate sites that can be merged with the article Click-to-donate site. These all are anyways stubs with little referencing and few have AfDs going on too. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fight Hunger, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ripple (charitable organisation) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Youth Noise (website). --Animeshkulkarni (talk) 08:27, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- We're talking here about the notability of the subject & I don't think so we've any good reason to merge it. But in case, if you want it to merge, at least you need some reliable sources to support the subject text. --S Q 08:53, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- What i meant was to cut these two lines from this article, expand the Click-to-donate site article to note which sites work likewise. Maybe note them countrywise. With the charitable cause they work for. And redirect this page to that main article. Will we require to fullfill strict notability requirements to even note them in another article? Wont proving existance with available references be sufficient? Lets discuss on this AfD alone. Will later comment on others accordingly. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 09:59, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- There are more than 100 of click to donate websites in operation but not all notable except a few. Should we will have to mention all those 100 sites in main article? By the way, notable click to donate sites are which already mentioned in main article.--S Q 10:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Fine by me. I don't know what the nominator has against charity sites. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:54, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- @Saqib Qayyum - If Newspapers are writing articles about all these 100 websites then we can mention them too. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 12:08, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay but they're not writing and if they're, provide sources. --S Q 14:25, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- @Saqib Qayyum - If Newspapers are writing articles about all these 100 websites then we can mention them too. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 12:08, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Fine by me. I don't know what the nominator has against charity sites. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:54, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- There are more than 100 of click to donate websites in operation but not all notable except a few. Should we will have to mention all those 100 sites in main article? By the way, notable click to donate sites are which already mentioned in main article.--S Q 10:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- What i meant was to cut these two lines from this article, expand the Click-to-donate site article to note which sites work likewise. Maybe note them countrywise. With the charitable cause they work for. And redirect this page to that main article. Will we require to fullfill strict notability requirements to even note them in another article? Wont proving existance with available references be sufficient? Lets discuss on this AfD alone. Will later comment on others accordingly. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 09:59, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- We're talking here about the notability of the subject & I don't think so we've any good reason to merge it. But in case, if you want it to merge, at least you need some reliable sources to support the subject text. --S Q 08:53, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by that? Please make yourself clear. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:41, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm talking about other click to donate websites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saqib Qayyum (talk • contribs) 13:51, 19 February 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, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:31, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
relisting in hope of non-latin script sources turning up to demonstrate notability per User:Ihcoyc. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:33, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Non latin scripts are not reliable. Saki talk 13:20, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- There is nothing inherently not reliable about sources in non-latin scripts, though it doesn't look like any have been found. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 12:22, 4 March 2012 (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.