Talk:Digital Photography Review
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=icon}
Speedy deletion request
editCome on now - the article states this is one of the top 1000 websites, and the article was referenced from 5 other Wikipedia articles already before it was created. For reference, slashdot.org is a top 500 website, and nobody would dream about deleting that[1]. Thue | talk 22:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Alexa ranking
editAt the time of writing, I think it's still justifiable to call DPReview a top-1,500 site. However, the trend over the last six months is slightly but noticeably downwards, so this will need watching. I'd better emphasise that I still think it's a significant website, and would remain so even at 2,000. Loganberry (Talk) 17:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Inappropriate content.
editAlthough I agree in principle, I think the words "sold out and sold its soul" are inapropriate in a Wikipedia article. They express an opinion rather than objective information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.82.25.164 (talk) 20:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Advert
editespecially "Main Site Features" is bad. 77.12.90.93 (talk) 02:50, 28 October 2012 (UTC)