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.
I dont find these sources satisfy GNG, for a number of reasons. For example all of them are old and local, and the
project died decade ago. -
Altenmann>talk
please don't cherry-pick / red-herring: the nom was nn dead. Of course we have on plenty of out-of-business articles. A bit below I also replied why I think it does not satisfy GNG. -
Altenmann>talk22:59, 17 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Defunct or not, I don't see this enterprise as meeting notability. The sourcing isn't helpful; an interview, a primary source and a non-Rs blog-type website. This is all I could find
[1], still lacking enough RS to cover this in order to get an article here.
Oaktree b (
talk)
20:18, 17 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep - this should have been closed as procedural keep a while ago, as a business being defunct is not a valid deletion reason. While Toronto Blog isn't a great source - it's good for fleshing out articles; and this
2013 article is a better source than the other two used/suggested. Also there are sources out there, such as an article in the magazine Building from 2014 (
ProQuest1518921098 and an in-depth article in the
City Centre Mirror (
ProQuest1328346152) - which while local, is from a major media outlet -
Torstar. Speaking of the
Toronto Star (the largest newspaper in the nation), there's 2 or 3 sources there, such as
this. There's arguments about it being local coverage - however there was a 2014
Canadian Press article carried nationally from coast-to-coast in major and minor papers, from
Halifax (
ProQuest1774635059 to
Kimberly, BC (
ProQuest1682143935).
Nfitz (
talk)
23:12, 6 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Reeks of UPE slop: "Projexity's tools aim to make it easy for the public to submit content such as events and initiatives to organizations directly through their own websites, effectively transforming any website into a dynamic community hub". Gee willikers! No sources, no real demonstration or claim to notability, no cigar. jp×
g🗯️11:10, 8 July 2024 (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.
I dont find these sources satisfy GNG, for a number of reasons. For example all of them are old and local, and the
project died decade ago. -
Altenmann>talk
please don't cherry-pick / red-herring: the nom was nn dead. Of course we have on plenty of out-of-business articles. A bit below I also replied why I think it does not satisfy GNG. -
Altenmann>talk22:59, 17 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Defunct or not, I don't see this enterprise as meeting notability. The sourcing isn't helpful; an interview, a primary source and a non-Rs blog-type website. This is all I could find
[1], still lacking enough RS to cover this in order to get an article here.
Oaktree b (
talk)
20:18, 17 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep - this should have been closed as procedural keep a while ago, as a business being defunct is not a valid deletion reason. While Toronto Blog isn't a great source - it's good for fleshing out articles; and this
2013 article is a better source than the other two used/suggested. Also there are sources out there, such as an article in the magazine Building from 2014 (
ProQuest1518921098 and an in-depth article in the
City Centre Mirror (
ProQuest1328346152) - which while local, is from a major media outlet -
Torstar. Speaking of the
Toronto Star (the largest newspaper in the nation), there's 2 or 3 sources there, such as
this. There's arguments about it being local coverage - however there was a 2014
Canadian Press article carried nationally from coast-to-coast in major and minor papers, from
Halifax (
ProQuest1774635059 to
Kimberly, BC (
ProQuest1682143935).
Nfitz (
talk)
23:12, 6 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Reeks of UPE slop: "Projexity's tools aim to make it easy for the public to submit content such as events and initiatives to organizations directly through their own websites, effectively transforming any website into a dynamic community hub". Gee willikers! No sources, no real demonstration or claim to notability, no cigar. jp×
g🗯️11:10, 8 July 2024 (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.