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.
No sources cited on page constitute as RS - either routine or affiliated with the company. A BEFORE search did not satisfy enough significant, independent coverage needed.
Willsome429 (
say hey or
see my edits!)
00:35, 27 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Lulz, I'm not affiliated to Ko-fi, I've not even used it in any form but is one of the most popular donation site for independent illustrators after Patreon. Most of the info I got from web archives from Archive.org, if I missed some sourcing I'd love to add them ;)
Neko Spectrus (
talk)
05:28, 28 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Response Hi
Gilded Snail can you please post here any two links to articles that meet the criteria for establishing notability. "enough reliable sources" is not the full criteria - the sources must also provide in-depth coverage of the subject (
WP:CORPDEPTH) and contain independent content (
WP:ORGIND). I have examined the links added to the article and I do not see any that meet the criteria - perhaps I have missed something?
HighKing++ 16:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete I am unable to locate a single reference that meets the criteria for establishing notability. Of the non-Primary sources and the non-obvious business-as-usual sources, this
Vice reference is a mention-in-passing and fails
WP:CORPDEPTH, this
Image reference does not cover the topic in any depth (fails
WP:CORPDEPTH) and relies on information provided by the founder (fails
WP:ORGIND), and finally
this The Week reference is
churnalism, relying almost entirely on information provided by the company, quotations from the founder, fails
WP:ORGIND.
HighKing++ 16:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete - sketchy references such as Twitter (
WP:TWITTER) and the company website - Ko-fi is not the subject of the articles in Verge, Vice Media and VentureBeat - does not meet
WP:ORGCRIT - therefore, delete -
Epinoia (
talk)
19:10, 17 August 2019 (UTC)reply
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.
No sources cited on page constitute as RS - either routine or affiliated with the company. A BEFORE search did not satisfy enough significant, independent coverage needed.
Willsome429 (
say hey or
see my edits!)
00:35, 27 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Lulz, I'm not affiliated to Ko-fi, I've not even used it in any form but is one of the most popular donation site for independent illustrators after Patreon. Most of the info I got from web archives from Archive.org, if I missed some sourcing I'd love to add them ;)
Neko Spectrus (
talk)
05:28, 28 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Response Hi
Gilded Snail can you please post here any two links to articles that meet the criteria for establishing notability. "enough reliable sources" is not the full criteria - the sources must also provide in-depth coverage of the subject (
WP:CORPDEPTH) and contain independent content (
WP:ORGIND). I have examined the links added to the article and I do not see any that meet the criteria - perhaps I have missed something?
HighKing++ 16:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete I am unable to locate a single reference that meets the criteria for establishing notability. Of the non-Primary sources and the non-obvious business-as-usual sources, this
Vice reference is a mention-in-passing and fails
WP:CORPDEPTH, this
Image reference does not cover the topic in any depth (fails
WP:CORPDEPTH) and relies on information provided by the founder (fails
WP:ORGIND), and finally
this The Week reference is
churnalism, relying almost entirely on information provided by the company, quotations from the founder, fails
WP:ORGIND.
HighKing++ 16:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete - sketchy references such as Twitter (
WP:TWITTER) and the company website - Ko-fi is not the subject of the articles in Verge, Vice Media and VentureBeat - does not meet
WP:ORGCRIT - therefore, delete -
Epinoia (
talk)
19:10, 17 August 2019 (UTC)reply
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.