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. Not one valid reason given for keeping. Neil ム 08:12, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vkontakte.ru (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Just another clone of Facebook, already mentioned in the main article. Violates WP:WEB. No reason to keep a separate article. Ash063 08:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep because it has a nice interwiki Russian-language article - it seems notable over there. Shalom ^Hello 17:06, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That kind of arguments is absolutely no good. There is a clear logical fallacy. Ru-wiki and En-wiki have different rules, but anyway existence or quality of interwiki isn't and never was an argument in discussion. Moreover, you said "ru-interwiki is nice" and it's nothing but your POV. "I like it" is an argument to avoid, see WP:AADD. Interwiki existence can't be a reason to overcome Wikipedia rules for sure. Once again, it seems not notable, it violates WP:WEB. There are many clones, they are already mentioned in the main article. Still, there is no reason to keep this article. — Ash063 19:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument seems a WP:JNN. - K.O.T. 20:40, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it seems so, I can be explain it in details. Look at WP:WEB criteria:

• 1.The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself.
• 2.The website or content has won a well-known and independent award from either a publication or organization.
• 3.The content is distributed via a medium which is both respected and independent of the creators.

I haven't found anything about it so it seems that this site fails WP:WEB. — Ash063 21:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete also as per WP:COI, it's just another self-promotion and promotion of author. There are no proofs of notability as required per WP:WEB. — Ash063 19:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think Vkontakte.ru article has been written by the website team? I've asked them, and they claim otherwise. They say that the appearance of a separate Vkontakte.ru article here is a surprise for them... K.O.T. 20:40, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It pleases to hear this. I hope that possible deletion of this separate article from English Wikipedia would not hurt these guys. — Ash063 21:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And what about Google hits? Google hits count simply for vkontakte.ru is big, but all of them are in Russian language. Google hits count for vkontakte.ru only within English-speaking pages [1] is only 632 and still most of them are in Russian or simply from spamsites. This clearly shows that this site is notable only within Russian-speaking segment of internet and isn't notable within English-speaking segment of internet. Therefore there is absolutely no need of nothing but a mention in Facebook article. So that article should be deleted. — Ash063 20:31, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unless reliable sources giving significant coverage are found Corpx 03:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you are not satisfied with [2], you can find absolute numbers of unique visitors per day at [3]. Then the only remaining question is whether half a million visitors a day is significant or not. K.O.T. 20:40, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Visitors count has nothing to do with "reliable sources giving significant coverage" =). — Ash063 21:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep because vkontakte is the biggest and the main Facebook clone; it is the 4th biggest web site in Russia (Alexa). German and Chinese clones are smaller, less technologically advanced and less successful than this one. Besides, it is not exactly a clone. Some features (e.g. ajax wall posts or video in groups) were introduced by Vkontakte, then adopted by Facebook. 17:52, 16 August 2007 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.131.163.100 (talk • contribs)

Being "4th biggest web site in Russia" is a good reason to have an article about vkontakte in Russian wiki, that's one of the reasons why Russian wiki exists. As well as being not notable for English-speaking world is a good reason to delete this article from English wiki. — Ash063 17:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep because there are already several Wikipedia articles on other Facebook clones, such as StudiVZ. If the German clone is not claimed to violate any Wikipedia rules, why a Russian one is? 09:30, 18 August 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by K.O.T. (talk • contribs).

Oh, please, your argument is WP:OTHERSTUFF. Who said that "German clone is not claimed to violate any Wikipedia rules"? — Ash063 16:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, in any case your original claim "No reason to keep a separate article" is simply an unmotivated POV. As to violation of WP:WEB, this would be indeed a serious argument for deletion, provided you could elaborate your claim. Saying that something just violates WP:WEB isn't sufficient. K.O.T. 20:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unmotivated POV? I wonder why you think so. This site is a successful clone of facebook, facebook use some features that were introduced by vkontakte? Enough for having a mention in facebook article, but not enough for having a separate article because vkontakte fails WP:WEB criteria. — Ash063 22:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete A startup isn't yet worth an article. Moikrug.ru (recently bought out by Yandex) fits better, but doesn't have one (I would vote 'keep' for it in case of AfD) --ssr 12:40, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's just a POV. Vkontakte.ru has much more individual visitors and page views per day than Moikrug.ru. So it's not that clear which site merits an article more. That's not too relevant for this discussion anyway. 14:53, 21 August 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by K.O.T. (talk • contribs).

Moikrug is on market since 2005 and is very popular (Yandex acquiring endorses) and numerously mentioned by general press (see [4]) unlike Vkontakte started recently (and article about it seems therefore to be obvious PR, also large number of hits may be a result of a viral campaign). --ssr 19:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, one project is two years old, the other is just one year old, but somewhat more successful: [5] Notice that Vkontakte has a large "hits per user" ratio, so all those visits cannot be casual. In any case, this is indeed WP:OTHERSTUFF - we don't discuss here whether Moikrug.ru merits an article or not. More importantly, popularity of vkontakte has been confirmed in Russian press several times, but I'm unable to point out any English-language publications for a very obvious reason. -- K.O.T. 20:29, 21 August 2007 (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.