Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rome2rio
- 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 keep. ]
Rome2rio
An advertorially toned page on an unremarkable travel website. Significant RS coverage not found. Sourcing does not meet
WP:SPIP. Created by Special:Contributions/Micamer and extensively edited by Special:Contributions/Kirsteenephelan - two accounts with no other contributions outside this topic. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:42, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
]
- Keep I added two more sources, including a Los Angeles Times source. Personally, I feel this is a pretty remarkable travel website, and have used it many times. The website has pretty high traffic, and is ranked 6,259th on the Alexa Rank. Wikipedia has pages for websites ranked much lower than this. talk) 20:54, 12 May 2018 (UTC)]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 02:44, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep – Has 181 hits on Factiva, including articles from BRW, AFR, The Australian, and SMH, as well as from overseas news organisations including the New York Times, The Times (UK), and TIME magazine, dating back to 2011. Many articles merely mention it as a listing among other travel apps, but others include it as the primary focus of the article. I'd say it meets ]
- Keep needs a rewrite but the TechCrunch and LA Times articles are significant Wolfson5 (talk) 03:45, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
- 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.