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.
Keep meets
WP:GNG and
WP:NPRODUCT. The article is about the software/platform, not about the company itself, so applying WP:NCORP is a stretch.
[1],
[2],
[3],
[4],
[5] all articles include anaylsis and description of the Skillit platform (and are reliable sources per
WP:RS, that's why on Wikipedia article, we have two lines about funding and a separate section about the platform. The article is very much expandable based on the provided references and is an encyclopedic topic in a niche industry like contruction, where software use is minimal.
SHilhorst (
talk)
14:28, 17 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete, I disagree with the author of the article who voted keep - this subject does not meet the general notability guideline or the subject specific notability guideline set out in WP:PRODUCT. Rather, I agree with the source assessment conducted by the nominator, these sources are sheerly routine and not significant coverage at all. Routine articles about funding are not sufficient for notability. Article should be deleted. —
MaxnaCarta (
💬 •
📝 )
08:50, 23 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete: If this were to be a considered as a product-focused article, then the funding information should be eliminated from consideration as both irrelevant and non-independent (noting that these don't contribute to NCORP notability anyway, largely arise from press releases, and SAAS startups are basically their product). Coverage in listicles and similar minor comparisons of similar products/services doesn't demonstrate individual notability, and I can't see suitable SIGCOV of the platform on a quick BEFORE. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~
(Talk)~04:07, 29 November 2023 (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.
Keep meets
WP:GNG and
WP:NPRODUCT. The article is about the software/platform, not about the company itself, so applying WP:NCORP is a stretch.
[1],
[2],
[3],
[4],
[5] all articles include anaylsis and description of the Skillit platform (and are reliable sources per
WP:RS, that's why on Wikipedia article, we have two lines about funding and a separate section about the platform. The article is very much expandable based on the provided references and is an encyclopedic topic in a niche industry like contruction, where software use is minimal.
SHilhorst (
talk)
14:28, 17 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete, I disagree with the author of the article who voted keep - this subject does not meet the general notability guideline or the subject specific notability guideline set out in WP:PRODUCT. Rather, I agree with the source assessment conducted by the nominator, these sources are sheerly routine and not significant coverage at all. Routine articles about funding are not sufficient for notability. Article should be deleted. —
MaxnaCarta (
💬 •
📝 )
08:50, 23 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete: If this were to be a considered as a product-focused article, then the funding information should be eliminated from consideration as both irrelevant and non-independent (noting that these don't contribute to NCORP notability anyway, largely arise from press releases, and SAAS startups are basically their product). Coverage in listicles and similar minor comparisons of similar products/services doesn't demonstrate individual notability, and I can't see suitable SIGCOV of the platform on a quick BEFORE. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~
(Talk)~04:07, 29 November 2023 (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.