Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bookitlive (Service)

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:11, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bookitlive (Service)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not seem to have any coverage beyond adverts and social media. Fails WP:GNG. Charles (talk) 09:02, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as no evidence of notability - Only stuff I've found is therapy related ... Fails GNG .–Davey2010 • (talk) 10:28, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No substantial coverage in reliable secondary sources. Nwlaw63 (talk) 18:15, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Edit Please suggest Edit required for article to be retained. I am new here and trying to understand why this article should be deleted when other wiki articles on other startup based business are the same. For example Dropbox, Aconex and Booking.com can it be refereed to admin who specializes in startups and online booking software. A Google search on bookitlive confirms coverage.Finella.oakley (talk) 03:16, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Finella, I think you're confused. The other companies that you have mentioned have significant coverage and plenty of secondary sources to pick from, bookitlive does not. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a newspaper, not a bulletin board and not an advertisement space. Any company can be 'googled' however what is important is notability and an easy way to compare bookitlive to any of the companies you mentioned above is to do a 'Google News' search. See my point? Orasis (talk) 06:21, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not meet notability requirements. It also borders on more of an advertisement than it does an article. Orasis (talk) 06:21, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Updated article to address the concerns raised by comments by adding reference examples. Has the same notability as other articles by similar startups and should not need paid PR media releases to justify its inclusion Finella.oakley (talk) 04:08, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reply The sources you added do not appear to be reliable secondary sources. Nwlaw63 (talk) 15:22, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unable to find any decent coverage. Doctorhawkes (talk) 11:23, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A startup company that develops original software for Australia's top 500 companies has notability, the references used demonstrate that these companies are organisations that are using the product. Can you provide example of what references are required?Finella.oakley (talk) 01:14, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here you go. WP:RS. Doctorhawkes (talk) 11:53, 22 September 2014 (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.