Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lulu.com

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. —Xezbeth 16:38, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

Lulu.com

Substub, unlikely to become more than it is now without resorting to advertising. --Jemiller226 06:22, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. I'm sure this is notable (Alexa ranking: 11,171). Notable company and website. Could include history of site, statistics and some notable books they've published to begin with. Mgm|^(talk) 08:38, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, notability not established. Possible web vanity. Radiant_* 09:40, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

  I think that 300,000 hits for "lulu.com" rather suggests some notability. --Henrygb 16:23, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - Vanity press advert - Tεxτurε 18:13, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep or merge into print on demand. I believe lulu is notable. I've used them myself independently of landing on this VfD entry. Brighterorange 21:26, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, per google/alexa results. Kappa 22:22, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Good stub for a commercial enterprise. But beware of using Alexa results--a company that supplies to a relatively small market may be significant but have a low Alexa rating; I've also seen low Alexa results cited as a reason to delete an article about a PAPER magazine. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:01, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and expand to show in the article that it does in fact have notability. --Idont Havaname 00:11, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I can't imagine any company would write such a boring vanity article. I've seen many mentions. --Alcon San Croix 01:41, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Nothing to indicate that this company is notable. Quale 03:47, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Spam. Delete unless rewritten. - Mike Rosoft 18:44, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. N-Man^talk 20:07, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep -- Longhair | Talk 01:50, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete encyclopedic relevance not established. --Mecanismo 20:57, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.