Deletion of Chowk.com (3rd nomination)

Comment: The nomination accuses the document of 4 things, each of which are not correct or irrelevant. First, the statement "No significant coverage in WP:RS" is false. {{u|Djm-leighpark}} examined the prior AfDs and Google Books and found reliable sources, including a book chapter. ({{u|Störm}} should have found these in a search required by ). The statement "Poor Alexa rank." is true but misleading: the site was defunct at the time. When the site was operating, per
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: The nom. has previously been commented as doing  when nominating AfD.  Can the nom. please explain the problems with ''defunct website'' and enumerate and explain with specific figures what is meant by ''poor Alexa rank''.  Part of the issue with  is that the article fails to explain the historical significance of the site ... my impression is of reading the article is there is a reasonable attempt of the article to set the historical context.   seems sated by previous fDs and would the nom. please explicitly contest the sources presented there.  If nom. does not do this within 48 hours I suggest moving to speedy keep if this is not reasonably attempted by that time.  Thankyou
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:VAGUEWAVE||WP:NWEB||WP:RS||WP:A)