- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was draftify. ✗ plicit 13:11, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Glass (social network)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Glass (social network) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Did a WP:BEFORE search, doesn't pass WP:BASIC or WP:SIGCOV. Article tone isn't the worst, but it's a promotional piece with no independent coverage. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:07, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:07, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 12:06, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Oppose deletion I created a stub article in hope it could be developed further. Don't really understand why someone wants to come along and delete it. It is not a promotional piece but states what it is and who it is intended for. I am not an employee or investor in the company. I would agree the article needs more work. However, if you create something in good faith, and then it's deleted because it's not a perfect article right away, that seems like a deterrent to working on Wikipedia. Moreover, the idea that the article has no independent coverage is patently untrue, given that both PetaPixel and writer Om Malik are independent from Glass. Fletcher ( talk) 05:00, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:00, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
- Draftify so it can be developed further and the author can prove its notability. It's not as promotional as claimed. Neocorelight ( Talk) 12:34, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
- Draftify is fine, but I'm not sure the subject meets WP:GNG. The best source I could find is this coverage from TechRadar. This may be a case of WP:TOOSOON. Suriname0 ( talk) 23:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
- Draftify - I added a couple of sources to beef this up but I think it's WP:TOOSOON. Hopefully there's be more coverage coming so we can revisit. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was draftify. ✗ plicit 13:11, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Glass (social network)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Glass (social network) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Did a WP:BEFORE search, doesn't pass WP:BASIC or WP:SIGCOV. Article tone isn't the worst, but it's a promotional piece with no independent coverage. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:07, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:07, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 12:06, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Oppose deletion I created a stub article in hope it could be developed further. Don't really understand why someone wants to come along and delete it. It is not a promotional piece but states what it is and who it is intended for. I am not an employee or investor in the company. I would agree the article needs more work. However, if you create something in good faith, and then it's deleted because it's not a perfect article right away, that seems like a deterrent to working on Wikipedia. Moreover, the idea that the article has no independent coverage is patently untrue, given that both PetaPixel and writer Om Malik are independent from Glass. Fletcher ( talk) 05:00, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:00, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
- Draftify so it can be developed further and the author can prove its notability. It's not as promotional as claimed. Neocorelight ( Talk) 12:34, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
- Draftify is fine, but I'm not sure the subject meets WP:GNG. The best source I could find is this coverage from TechRadar. This may be a case of WP:TOOSOON. Suriname0 ( talk) 23:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
- Draftify - I added a couple of sources to beef this up but I think it's WP:TOOSOON. Hopefully there's be more coverage coming so we can revisit. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.