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.
Comment – I'm not sure they really get what the purpose of an AfD is? See our interactions
on my talk page. They seem to think that the article meets NCORP, but other than just saying that they haven't really addressed anyone's concerns really? Sources not even mentioning the subject concerns me. They also didn't confirm nor deny when I asked them if it was possible they were a paid editor... I'm not incredibly familiar with what UPE looks like, but I would think the average person would say something along the lines of "no, I'm not being paid for my edits"?
Clovermoss(talk)17:12, 13 September 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete as a run-of-the-mill startup advertising and COI (probably UPE). Clearly the author is only here to promote the company and not to build the rest of the encyclopedia. Despite requests to disclose COI, they have not, but it's obvious they are involved and approaching this as PR. Regardless of sources in the article, it would have to be completely rewritten, so there is no point in making it a draft either. —
HELLKNOWZ∣TALK12:14, 16 September 2022 (UTC)reply
As stated above: "Lack of
notability can't be fixed by any amount of editing". None of the sources pass the
WP:GNG requirements. Without independent reliable in-depth sources, the article can never be anything other than promotional. —
HELLKNOWZ∣TALK12:08, 17 September 2022 (UTC)reply
Hello, I've just modified and revised my article. I hope my changes make the information more balanced for you and I added some reliable independent sources
Mpromax (
talk)
14:01, 18 September 2022 (UTC)reply
The new sources are a private inaccessible workspace, newspaper from 1915, a copy of app store listing, basically an ad for an app, and an app store link. Nothing even close to
WP:GNG sources. —
HELLKNOWZ∣TALK21:41, 18 September 2022 (UTC)reply
Hello, I've just modified and revised my article. I hope my changes make the information more balanced for you and I added some reliable independent sources
Mpromax (
talk)
01:52, 19 September 2022 (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.
Comment – I'm not sure they really get what the purpose of an AfD is? See our interactions
on my talk page. They seem to think that the article meets NCORP, but other than just saying that they haven't really addressed anyone's concerns really? Sources not even mentioning the subject concerns me. They also didn't confirm nor deny when I asked them if it was possible they were a paid editor... I'm not incredibly familiar with what UPE looks like, but I would think the average person would say something along the lines of "no, I'm not being paid for my edits"?
Clovermoss(talk)17:12, 13 September 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete as a run-of-the-mill startup advertising and COI (probably UPE). Clearly the author is only here to promote the company and not to build the rest of the encyclopedia. Despite requests to disclose COI, they have not, but it's obvious they are involved and approaching this as PR. Regardless of sources in the article, it would have to be completely rewritten, so there is no point in making it a draft either. —
HELLKNOWZ∣TALK12:14, 16 September 2022 (UTC)reply
As stated above: "Lack of
notability can't be fixed by any amount of editing". None of the sources pass the
WP:GNG requirements. Without independent reliable in-depth sources, the article can never be anything other than promotional. —
HELLKNOWZ∣TALK12:08, 17 September 2022 (UTC)reply
Hello, I've just modified and revised my article. I hope my changes make the information more balanced for you and I added some reliable independent sources
Mpromax (
talk)
14:01, 18 September 2022 (UTC)reply
The new sources are a private inaccessible workspace, newspaper from 1915, a copy of app store listing, basically an ad for an app, and an app store link. Nothing even close to
WP:GNG sources. —
HELLKNOWZ∣TALK21:41, 18 September 2022 (UTC)reply
Hello, I've just modified and revised my article. I hope my changes make the information more balanced for you and I added some reliable independent sources
Mpromax (
talk)
01:52, 19 September 2022 (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.