Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zanran (2nd nomination)

Zanran

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

2nd AFD for this one. Was deleted last time. Search engine parked "on the cloud". Not notable, blogs for references. One patent from the UK, but that doesn't demonstrate or establish notability. The site might be interesting, but not interesting enough for reliable sources to cover it yet. Dennis Brown (talk) 12:33, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I had previously requested CSD for recreation of content deleted via AFD (CSD:G4) but the admin reviewed and found the content was different enough to exclude it from qualifying. I don't think it qualifies otherwise under speedy delete, else I would have done that. Note that the article creator is an SPA with the same name as the search engine in both incarnations of this article. Dennis Brown (talk) 12:37, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep [1][2]. Also, Search Engine Land, already in the article, was deemed a RS at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Search engine optimization. The blogs aren't exactly doo-doo either. [3]. 86.44.31.213 (talk) 15:17, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:17, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not accurate - Search Engine Land was mentioned ONE time in a comment by ONE user, and reliability of the source wasn't at stake, so your claim is misleading. It is not on any list as a reliable source here. It doesn't even pass the criteria or have its own page here on Wikipedia. As for blogs, well, they are blogs and few pass the sniff test for RS, even if they are notable by themselves. I will happily leave that to the closing admin to determine the reliability of those sources. Dennis Brown (talk) 20:12, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ten editors scrutinized the sources. SandyGeorgia explicitly called for the sourcing to be examined, & comments were requested at the RS noticeboard and elsewhere. This is all at the link you were given. 86.44.31.213 (talk) 02:30, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep– Significant coverage in reliable sources confers with this topic passing WP:GNG:

Template:French icon Chartier, Mathieu (May 26, 2011). "Zanran, search engine data and statistics". Pcworld.fr. Retrieved January 12, 2012. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
Template:French icon Bekkaoui, Selma (May 25, 2011). "Zanran, the new search engine data is available in beta!". Fr.techcrunch.com. Retrieved January 12, 2012. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)

There's also a Christian Science Monitor blog article, but the source of the blog is not under the editorial control of CS Monitor. I'll post it here to let other users comment about it's status:

Marron, Donald (May 16, 2011). "Will Zanran be the Google for data?". The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved January 12, 2012. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)

—Northamerica1000^(talk) 20:03, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The PCworld.fr article is rather short (3 paragraphs), but obviously they are a reliable source. The only one, which is odd since the engine doesn't support French.... The other is a blog, and the CSmonitor "article" is on their blog, with a guest blogger yet, would be ok as a passing reference but I think it is a bit weak to demonstrate notability. That is the problem, all but one ref is a blog, and the one is a bit weak on it's own. Dennis Brown (talk) 20:12, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]