Talk:CarProperty.com

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Keep, 15 August 2020, see discussion.
keep, 18 December 2015, see discussion.

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 13 February 2015 by reviewer Hirolovesswords (talk · contribs).

Automobiles Low‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Websites: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

2023 Nomination

This article does not have any notability. The New York Times article discusses the novel idea for car garage rentals, and that should be a generic page rather than a specific commercial page. There are hundreds of thousands of websites dealing with these issues, and there would need to be a notable reason to describe this website. Was it the first of its kind? Doubtful, and there are no citations explaining its importance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LoveElectronicLiterature (talk • contribs) 16:49, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

COI

This article was written by a paid editor, commissioned on the f****r.com website. Logical Cowboy (talk) 17:37, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article is now substantially different than the one created by the (alleged) paid editor [1], so the (alleged) paid editor should not be considered a "major contributor". As for notability, the website has received significant coverage in the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, Detroit News, and Toronto Star. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 19:24, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you know what you are talking about. How do you know which account is the paid editor? How do you know there is only one account involved in paid editing? You don't. Logical Cowboy (talk) 20:13, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Only three editors have edited this page - you, myself, and one other. So, it's pretty clear who is the (alleged) paid editor is and that only one account is involved in paid editing. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 22:09, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry, I'm sure you said that the article creator was a newcomer who is not a paid editor. In any case, you have made some nice improvements to this undeclared paid article that was created in violation of the Terms of Use. Whether that is really a good idea is another question. Logical Cowboy (talk) 22:24, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Based on what I have seen, I can not say that I am 100% sure that the article creator is a paid editor. However, even if he was the issues of COI, advertising, and notability have been resolved, as the article has pretty much been rewritten. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 22:41, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]