Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flackle

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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 08:40, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Flackle[edit]

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

It exists, but I can't find any third-party sources to establish WP:GNG. Article has no references and was created by owner. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 02:18, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find sources either. He claims to have added a whole bunch, but when you look at them they are either primary sources or sources that don't add anything to the article (alexa ranking, etc). Definitely a concern on WP:COI, I made that evident in the talk page. Besides that I say we give him some time to build the page. It is in definite need of WP:NPOV though and lacks real objectivity. Semmendinger (talk) 03:06, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

After review and some attempts at fixing up the page, there' just too much information that's not even relevant to the project, and too many edits that seem to promote advertising. Delete for now. In the future, if this app takes off and has some real news about it, the page may be re-written. Semmendinger (talk) 16:10, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 03:13, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. at best, not yet notable. DGG ( talk ) 03:27, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Not notable. Sources are all self-published or irrelevant Exemplo347 (talk) 08:29, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as corporate spam and typical "tech startup blurb". No indications of notability or significance. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:41, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
SNOW Delete as it's clear this is only existing for advertising and it's been blatant about it, hence WP:NOT applies. SwisterTwister talk 07:34, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - WP:GNG - Fails WP:GNG since there are no neutral significant sources. -- Taketa (talk) 09:20, 11 December 2016 (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.