Talk:Jyte

This article was nominated for deletion on 2007-02-09. The result of the discussion was No consensus.

I don't know how many users are needed to qualify for notability, but the user community is pretty active. Granted, I'm biased, because I'm sorta addicted. Ojcit 05:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

notabililty

I don't think it's a candidate for speedy deletion, since the site has been noticed by several blogs, is substantial technical effort in a number of ways, and has a rapidly growing user base. If there's a notability question, humans are free to bring it up, but I'm hoping I've satisfied at least the computers. Technorati stats are avialable here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ojcit (talk • contribs) 05:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I don't think that any of those are valid proofs of notability. 'The site has been noticed by several blogs' is ambigious; it doesn't say how widely-read those blogs are. The amount of effort put into it also doesn't make it notable, nor does the fact that its user base is 'rapidly growing' ([[WP:NOT#CRYSTAL|Wikipedia is not a crystal ball). I think it's a definite speedy deletion candidate. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 17:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are 30,900 Google hits for "jyte -rss" (the -rss is to avoid confusion with Jyte, the feed aggregator). That's got to count for something. — 76.210.198.8 17:39, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Googlehits are an often used tool, but they generally don't hold water. The list of widely-accepted notability criteria for web-based content can be found here; note the lack of mention of googlehits. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 17:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why not just take this to AFD? Anon 76.210.198.8 was me, by the way. — Bcat ^{(talk • email)} 17:43, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 17:44, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's time this goes back to AfD. Jyte has gone nowhere in the past 10 months. Its ranking is falling out of the top 100,000 on Alexa. It wasn't notable in the first place. Part of wikipedia's policy is that a sudden flurry of activity does NOT make a topic notable. One mention on Techchrunch when it was new doesn't cut it. Nor does lots of hits on Google. Only well-established, respected third-party sources paying it real attention mean anything. Jyte is pretty unexceptional even as far as attention from unimportant sources goes. Sure it's a fun site and all but articles like this pollute wikipedia with garbage. As a formality I'm marking it with the templates for a while, but if it doesn't magically assert itself in the next week or so I'm going to come back and nominate it for deletion TheBilly (talk) 10:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure there cities listed on Wikipedia with fewer citizens than Jyte has users. Same for operating systems, religions, etc. Cults are almost as easy to start as websites, and they have tax-exempt status. I imagine most of the 2 million subjects that have legitimate articles are outside of the top 100000, unless I didn't do the math right. Ojcit (talk) 06:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yawn* http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Arguments_to_avoid_in_deletion_discussions#All_or_nothing TheBilly (talk) 21:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think ojcit's point was that your Alexa 100,000 argument was lame, and I agree -- Jyte.com's Alexa page ranking seems meaningless here. That said, I don't see a lot of point in keeping this article; Wikipedia is not a web directory (though Jyte's Google page rank is high enough that it is starting to turn up in a large number of searches). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vynce (talk • contribs) 19:06, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]