- 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 delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:29, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
Virtudesk
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Virtudesk ( | 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)
Sources are paid spam [1] [2] [3] or non reliable. It does not seem to pass WP:NCORP. MarioGom ( talk) 15:10, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MarioGom ( talk) 15:10, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. MarioGom ( talk) 15:10, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Delete This is little more than an advert, sources are not reliable, don't see how the company is notable. -- CameronVictoria ( talk) 20:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - No reliable independent citation found. Will not meet notability guidelines. Mommmyy ( talk) 21:01, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. I don't see any reliable sources in the article, and can't find any either. Tol ( talk | contribs) @ 03:07, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Sources are not reliable, non-notable company. Brayan ocaner ( talk) 15:57, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Sources used are credible because not only are they well-known by users (e.g. Inc Magazine and Analytics Insight), but their online channels also have a very high domain authority (in the that many of the sources included have a 60 or higher domain, with some 90+) and readership. This means that search engines such as Google classify them as high-authority and credible to users, and rank these outlets high on page 1 of searches. Many of the sources included are also big news outlets. Plus, Virtudesk is gaining more credible coverage every week, and we can continue to add to the article when those come out, and edit out old sources. Thanks guys.
Ares-2021 (
talk)
23:22, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
- @
Ares-2021: Here is my review of the references given as of
revision #1063623990 at 01:35, 4 January 2022: In summary, absolutely none of these demonstrate the significant coverage in reliable and independent sources needed to establish notability.
- WBOC: As it says at the top, it's "Sponsored: Advertising Content".
- Apollo: Also advertising; begins with "VirtuDesk is the perfect solution for your business!".
- WRDE: same as WBOC.
- Starter Story: It's written by the founder so it's not independent.
- Inc.: This is a company profile, and doesn't establish notability.
- ValiantCEO: An interview with the founder isn't independent, and the site notes that they "publish pieces as written by outside contributors", and that these "are not commissioned by [their] editorial team".
- WICZ: same as WBOC.
- Analytics Insight: another interview with the founder, which is not independent.
Also, a website being ranked high in Google search results does not imply reliability. If Virtudesk "is gaining more credible coverage every week" like you say, then come back and write the article when it's notable — Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Tol ( talk | contribs) @ 01:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)- The WBOC/WRDE/WICZ advertising is the exact same advertising on three channels' websites, possibly to create the impression of wider coverage.
- The two interviews and the one written by the founder are the opposite of independent.
- The company profile is from a reliable source ( Inc.) but is not significant coverage.
- The Apollo source is advertising.
- @
Ares-2021: Here is my review of the references given as of
revision #1063623990 at 01:35, 4 January 2022:
- Delete can't find anything that sugeests notability Devokewater (talk) 15:36, 8 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 delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:29, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
Virtudesk
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Virtudesk ( | 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)
Sources are paid spam [1] [2] [3] or non reliable. It does not seem to pass WP:NCORP. MarioGom ( talk) 15:10, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MarioGom ( talk) 15:10, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. MarioGom ( talk) 15:10, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Delete This is little more than an advert, sources are not reliable, don't see how the company is notable. -- CameronVictoria ( talk) 20:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - No reliable independent citation found. Will not meet notability guidelines. Mommmyy ( talk) 21:01, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. I don't see any reliable sources in the article, and can't find any either. Tol ( talk | contribs) @ 03:07, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Sources are not reliable, non-notable company. Brayan ocaner ( talk) 15:57, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Sources used are credible because not only are they well-known by users (e.g. Inc Magazine and Analytics Insight), but their online channels also have a very high domain authority (in the that many of the sources included have a 60 or higher domain, with some 90+) and readership. This means that search engines such as Google classify them as high-authority and credible to users, and rank these outlets high on page 1 of searches. Many of the sources included are also big news outlets. Plus, Virtudesk is gaining more credible coverage every week, and we can continue to add to the article when those come out, and edit out old sources. Thanks guys.
Ares-2021 (
talk)
23:22, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
- @
Ares-2021: Here is my review of the references given as of
revision #1063623990 at 01:35, 4 January 2022: In summary, absolutely none of these demonstrate the significant coverage in reliable and independent sources needed to establish notability.
- WBOC: As it says at the top, it's "Sponsored: Advertising Content".
- Apollo: Also advertising; begins with "VirtuDesk is the perfect solution for your business!".
- WRDE: same as WBOC.
- Starter Story: It's written by the founder so it's not independent.
- Inc.: This is a company profile, and doesn't establish notability.
- ValiantCEO: An interview with the founder isn't independent, and the site notes that they "publish pieces as written by outside contributors", and that these "are not commissioned by [their] editorial team".
- WICZ: same as WBOC.
- Analytics Insight: another interview with the founder, which is not independent.
Also, a website being ranked high in Google search results does not imply reliability. If Virtudesk "is gaining more credible coverage every week" like you say, then come back and write the article when it's notable — Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Tol ( talk | contribs) @ 01:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)- The WBOC/WRDE/WICZ advertising is the exact same advertising on three channels' websites, possibly to create the impression of wider coverage.
- The two interviews and the one written by the founder are the opposite of independent.
- The company profile is from a reliable source ( Inc.) but is not significant coverage.
- The Apollo source is advertising.
- @
Ares-2021: Here is my review of the references given as of
revision #1063623990 at 01:35, 4 January 2022:
- Delete can't find anything that sugeests notability Devokewater (talk) 15:36, 8 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.