Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gaption

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 speedy delete. WP:CSD#G11 Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:59, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Gaption

Gaption (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Notability. Yet another start-up with a keen editor but a lack of _independent_ coverage. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:42, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 09:50, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 09:50, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

• Speedy delete as unambiguous advertising on an entitity with no indications of notability or significance. Entirely promotional article with WP:SPIP sourcing. I requested a speedy deletion under G11; let's see if it takes. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:55, 23 October 2017 (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.