Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MyFreeImplants
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. --Sam Blanning(talk) 00:27, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
MyFreeImplants
Website that does not seem to meet
WP:WEB in terms of notability. Some mentioning of site elsewhere, relatively low google results, -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 21:55, 27 August 2006 (UTC)-- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 21:55, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
]
- Delete, advertising. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:55, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep , seems to me that this is a legitimate article. I've heard about this company twice on the radio, and was present at Erotica-LA for the giveaway and as such I thought it would be a useful addition to Wikipedia. In full disclosure I am a user of the website and have contributed to several women on the website. I considered adding this article before, but it wasn't until the website was featured on the BBC story (cited in the article) that I felt it was worthy of Wikipedia's standards. Jahgok 22:19, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The above is the creator of the article, whose only edits to Wikipedia are related to the subject at hand. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:32, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a true statement. We all have to start somewhere, and I chose to start on an area I am familiar with that was not yet covered. Please do not bite the newcomers. Jahgok 22:55, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: ]
- This is a true statement. We all have to start somewhere, and I chose to start on an area I am familiar with that was not yet covered. Please do not bite the newcomers. Jahgok 22:55, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The above is the creator of the article, whose only edits to Wikipedia are related to the subject at hand. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:32, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, no evidence that site meets ]
- Comment Doesn't a BBC news special about the topic make it meet WP:WEB? After some further digging I've found that the topic is also featured in an upcoming book Beauty Junkies: Inside Our $15 Billion Obsession With Cosmetic Surgery by Alex Kuczynski an author for The New York Times. The book has not yet been released however. Jahgok 16:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: To me, it's dependent on one's personal definition of "non-trivial" mentions per WP:WEB, about the site itself and not just the topics of breast enhancement, cyberbegging, etc. The blurb about the BBC Three show doesn't mention the site at all, just the breast enhancement market in general, and there's no indication (without watching it or reading a transcript) that it's mentioned in a more than passing fashion on the program itself. Likewise, the Houston Press article is more about cyberbegging in general, and mentions the site in a vague "here are some sites we found" context rather than truly being "about" it. The AVN thing is also just an ad for some promotion that mentions the site in a context of a giveaway. I can't speak to the reliability of Vyuz as a news source, however. Of course, other editors' opinions may vary, so I welcome their input as well, in terms of possibly changing my recommendation. --Kinu t/c 16:49, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Thanks for clearing up your POV Kinu. I'm thinking that perhaps this audio clip from The Adam Carolla Show may offer some extra evidence as to the legitimacy of the article. His show is syndicated in 11 markets and is part of CBS Radio. No small potatoes! :) Jahgok 02:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: To me, it's dependent on one's personal definition of "non-trivial" mentions per
- Comment Doesn't a BBC news special about the topic make it meet
- Keep - Has 3 referenced noteworthy news articles (BBC included). MECU≈talk 19:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Did you even look at the references? They have nothing to do with the article's subject, as mentioned above. --Kinu t/c 01:14, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment As mentioned above, I have a user account on the MyFreeImplants website, and I can attest to the fact that the BBC show mentioned the website in the TV program. The program aired yesterday (Tuesday, August 29, 2006) and there was a rush of new female signups on the website, probably a good 90 new girls all from the UK who saw the show. Jahgok 03:04, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment In addition, although the BBC website doesn't specifically mention the website by name, here is the reference to it:
It is my opinion this is an obvious reference to MyFreeImplants. There are no other websites like this to my knowledge. Jahgok 03:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]Laura Taylor has wanted a boob job ever since she was 14. She's so desperate to change her breasts she’s logged on to an innovative website that allows men to donate money to women to help them fund a boob job.
- Comment: Unfortunately, a "possible" reference such as the one you mention doesn't count as a ]
- Comment: Did you even look at the references? They have nothing to do with the article's subject, as mentioned above. --Kinu t/c 01:14, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Kinu t/c 05:31, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: As a show of good faith, I've relisted this discussion to determine what other editors think, based on the information presented above. --Kinu t/c 05:34, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Spam. Allon FambrizziAllon Fambrizzi
- Weak Keep. It goes over things well, and plastic surgery is notable, especially breast implants, which are really their own cottage industry. It is advertisement-esque, but it's not badly written for an AfD article, and I'll give it a chance. For now.-Kmaguir1 06:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: ]
- Weak Delete - Alexa gives a ranking around 122,000 for the site, and the average traffic has dropped around 50% in the last 3 months. I think this got some media notice, but is now rapidly fading away. Brianyoumans 06:36, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I think you will see this rebound upon the next Alexa update. Last night August 30, 2006 Jay Leno mentioned the website during his monologue on The Tonight Show and I've sent an email to the site owner who confirms this, I am still looking for a transcript or video of the show for proof. Jahgok 05:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Just as I suspected, check out the spike in the most recent Alexa graph seems as if public interest is growing. Jahgok 03:10, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Also, I've found this recap of the BBC program from someone that watched the show. Jahgok 05:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I think you will see this rebound upon the next Alexa update. Last night August 30, 2006 Jay Leno mentioned the website during his monologue on The Tonight Show and I've sent an email to the site owner who confirms this, I am still looking for a transcript or video of the show for proof. Jahgok 05:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep - seems notable and has decent references. --mathewguiver 14:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Kinu, until more relevant press coverage can be cited. bikeable (talk) 17:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per all above. wikipediatrix 20:34, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Despite references, Alexa rankings and low Google hits indicate this was a very low-profile fad which never made it into the public consciousness. -Elmer Clark 21:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment So where is the wiki page that outlines the minimum requirements for Alexa and Google rankings? Is there a quantitative value that can be derived from using these servics that then corresponds to a thumbs-up or thumbs-down for a wiki inclusion? And why are those two companies chosen as the barometer? Or is is mearly a persons opinion based on those services? One would easily assume that a website with poor search engine optimization would be penalized on wikipedia! And not based purely on the facts realted to said website, but based on the skill level of the web developer for the website. Jahgok 17:34, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Dancter 18:00, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment So where is the wiki page that outlines the minimum requirements for Alexa and Google rankings? Is there a quantitative value that can be derived from using these servics that then corresponds to a thumbs-up or thumbs-down for a wiki inclusion? And why are those two companies chosen as the barometer? Or is is mearly a persons opinion based on those services? One would easily assume that a website with poor search engine optimization would be penalized on wikipedia! And not based purely on the facts realted to said website, but based on the skill level of the web developer for the website. Jahgok 17:34, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The video from The Tonight Show with Jay Leno is now available on iTunes and a clip that mentions the topic of this article is available on Google Video. Jay doesn't specifically mention the name of the website, but there is only one Los Angeles based website that gives away free breast implants in this manner, so the reference is obviously in regards to MyFreeImplants. Jahgok 16:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: A brief, 15-second mention on a Leno monologue, which doesn't even mention the site name, and isn't really even about the site but a tongue-in-cheek reference (to paraphrase) to lending a helping hand or two, hardly seems to satisfy ]
- Delete not notable. Mukadderat 18:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - per Elmer Clark. Zaxem 06:41, 9 September 2006 (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.