Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pinsex

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. There appears to be a consensus that this article was created too soon. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:50, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pinsex

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to massively fail WP:GNG and WP:WEB. The two secondary sources listed in the references section do not mention this web site at all, and I am unable to locate any reliable third-party coverage of this porn site online. PROD was contested by the author. VQuakr (talk) 01:07, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I couldn't find any reliable sources covering the site. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 01:34, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't Delete. Alright. Hold your horses. I wrote this article as the ta first in a series on the whole "pinboard" movement. I emailed my professor about finding more sources for this site specifically. He emailed me back and said he had them and he's sending them soon... but it's like 4:30am... so I'm assuming he meant in the morning. Put the gun down. Sources on the way. As a side note, this is my first Wikipedia article. I sandboxed it for a whole day, read through the entire labyrinth of rules, and have made every change that's been requested of me. The sources I included so far are all recent and cover the impact that these sites in general, which have been in development for at least two years, but whose origin really dates back to Bulletin Board Systems, are having on today's culture right now. So the articles I submitted were for corroborating evidence and my professor is providing me with sources that reference this site (and the others I'll be writing about) directly. So your patience please. It's a new field that's exploding, but I'm on it. — User:Juanaffiliato 04:37, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Though it is possible an admin will delete this article early, I think it is likely that the deletion discussion will last the typical 7 days. VQuakr (talk) 03:42, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:04, 27 July 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, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:03, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Three refs are given. One is Alexa, one is a primary source and the other two don't mention the subject of the article. 101.172.127.242 (talk) 09:09, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:WEB. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 21:46, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - But give more time to editor for fairness in case anyone can help make this article more notable. A fair time, but not too long.

Please remember that Wikipedia is not a list of all things, but of items, events and people who have bcome notable of one of more things. And I am not talking about their fifteen seconds or minutes of minor fame. This article gave me the impression it is very close to being an advertizement for a start up company. If it was clearly an ad, it would have been quickly deleted. As it stands this company may fold within a year or so if averages are followed. There are tens of thousands of companies that rise, struggle and fail. Just being does not make them notable. I hope this helps you understand.

You may be a fan of this company, but give it time. It may become something of a notable business. Or it may not. I would save your information and revisit the subject down the road. If it fails, no big deal. If it rises into notability, then you are ready for an article with more citations and information as to why it is notable. Then it will stand and others will try to make it better. Jrcrin001 (talk) 06:30, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Delete - I'm the author of this article. My name is Juan Carlos. I'm a doctorate student at the University of Barcelona, and this is my first Wikipedia article. Today I added a primary source that directly references Pinsex. Articles are starting to come out about the site now for the following reasons: 1. I first noticed this site when I was preparing to write a Thesis on Social Media that focused heavily on Pinterest... which seems to be going the way of Instagram. The notability of THAT site is no longer deniable. (Although its page was initially deleted and scheduled for deletion many times.) At that time Pinsex was ranked 5,980,000 in the world. While double-checking my sources for my thesis I noticed it had dropped to 1,600,000th. That's when I decided to write about it. I intentionally chose an adult site because some very few articles (Xvideos, Youporn, Redtube) have managed to meet the bar of notability and become accepted articles and I wanted to work on an article which wasn't as critical as the future article I intend to write on interactive social media. Since I first started the site is now down to 624,000th or so and more information is becoming available on the site. Not all of it is publicly available (since this is an adult site a lot of the sources I've found have been on member sites that require a login), but I'm beginning to find these articles now. So I would also like to ask for more time to post sources as they come as I'm still writing my Thesis at the same time I'm trying to keep my one little article alive. But I will continue adding sources and improving the site and taking all suggestions and I will listen to all the advice you have to give and do everything I can to strengthen this article so that, through this process, my next article will be even better. - Juanaffiliato (talk) 14:20, 7 August 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.