The result was delete. I have discarded the new/spa/nonpolicy based votes and all the experienced contributors boted delete Spartaz Humbug! 16:15, 5 May 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails the criteria in
WP:GNG and specifically
Wikipedia:Notability (web). There is no sustained coverage of TheDigitel.com in any independent,
third party sources. The article, which is obviously written as an advertisement, has a lot of links, but none show that TheDigitel.com is "the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself." Not to be confused with Digitel Solutions, Ltd.
www
Agreed that the article as it stands reads like an advert, but the website is now a reasonably long-standard news source and product of Charleson, and other southern cities, with advertisers having paid money on the site. Thus it is established as an independent news source on the web, alongside many other similar websites which have similar wikipedia entries. Looks to me like it could just do with being trimmed down and written more succinctly. Geofftech ( talk) 14:51, 21 April 2011 (UTC) reply
Another argument for including this page is that it needs mentioning in, at the very least, the local media sections for the South Carolina cities of Myrtle Beach, Charleston, and Beaufort. Having a singular page frees the need to repeatedly describe the source and it's hybrid reporting environment. Would agree this posts needs cleanup to hone in on the role and collaborative aspects of the site, I'll do some work soon and update back here. -- Ken E. H. ( talk) 16:51, 21 April 2011 (UTC) reply
I don't understand. Since TheDigitel sites themselves serve as an independent 3rd party news source to their respective geographic regions. Therefore, finding another independent 3rd party source that provides "sustained coverage" of TheDigitel seems like a guideline that does not fit well with the function of this, or any small town, news reporting entity. TheDigitel is notable and significant in that it let's any authenticated user contribute new stories and edit existing ones. I do appreciate the need to verify articles are not for an insignificant websites and their claims can be proven. Given that context, Dennis Bratland, how can that be proven to your satisfaction? Paul B Reynolds ( talk) 14:23, 22 April 2011 (UTC) reply
How satisfy the guidelines is explained in the articles I just linked to, and in Wikipedia:Notability (web). Read those pages and if there are parts of those policies you don't understand, ask a question on the talk page or here. Whether I'm satisfied or not is not of prime concern. My opinion isn't any more important than yours or than anybody else's. What matters is whether the subject meets or does not meet the criteria. Ultimately, an administrator decides whether to delete the page, and that can be appealed if you want input from more editors. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 15:24, 22 April 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. I have discarded the new/spa/nonpolicy based votes and all the experienced contributors boted delete Spartaz Humbug! 16:15, 5 May 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails the criteria in
WP:GNG and specifically
Wikipedia:Notability (web). There is no sustained coverage of TheDigitel.com in any independent,
third party sources. The article, which is obviously written as an advertisement, has a lot of links, but none show that TheDigitel.com is "the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself." Not to be confused with Digitel Solutions, Ltd.
www
Agreed that the article as it stands reads like an advert, but the website is now a reasonably long-standard news source and product of Charleson, and other southern cities, with advertisers having paid money on the site. Thus it is established as an independent news source on the web, alongside many other similar websites which have similar wikipedia entries. Looks to me like it could just do with being trimmed down and written more succinctly. Geofftech ( talk) 14:51, 21 April 2011 (UTC) reply
Another argument for including this page is that it needs mentioning in, at the very least, the local media sections for the South Carolina cities of Myrtle Beach, Charleston, and Beaufort. Having a singular page frees the need to repeatedly describe the source and it's hybrid reporting environment. Would agree this posts needs cleanup to hone in on the role and collaborative aspects of the site, I'll do some work soon and update back here. -- Ken E. H. ( talk) 16:51, 21 April 2011 (UTC) reply
I don't understand. Since TheDigitel sites themselves serve as an independent 3rd party news source to their respective geographic regions. Therefore, finding another independent 3rd party source that provides "sustained coverage" of TheDigitel seems like a guideline that does not fit well with the function of this, or any small town, news reporting entity. TheDigitel is notable and significant in that it let's any authenticated user contribute new stories and edit existing ones. I do appreciate the need to verify articles are not for an insignificant websites and their claims can be proven. Given that context, Dennis Bratland, how can that be proven to your satisfaction? Paul B Reynolds ( talk) 14:23, 22 April 2011 (UTC) reply
How satisfy the guidelines is explained in the articles I just linked to, and in Wikipedia:Notability (web). Read those pages and if there are parts of those policies you don't understand, ask a question on the talk page or here. Whether I'm satisfied or not is not of prime concern. My opinion isn't any more important than yours or than anybody else's. What matters is whether the subject meets or does not meet the criteria. Ultimately, an administrator decides whether to delete the page, and that can be appealed if you want input from more editors. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 15:24, 22 April 2011 (UTC) reply