Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haikubox

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 no consensus‎. Star Mississippi 14:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haikubox[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Promotional article. Only about 42 Google results for this product. There's a source cited which looks like an academic source here [1] that doesn't appear to mention Haikubox at all. Nor does this [2] so the appearance of being well-referenced is somewhat misleading. The WIRED review is real, but somewhat WP:ROUTINE versus a WP:SIGCOV. Also has cite links to a github page and other stuff so basically a WP:REFBOMB. Andre🚐 09:34, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Owen× ☎ 09:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the opportunity to participate in this discussion.

We agree that the two articles mentioned by the editor do not reference Haikubox, but did not mean to suggest that they did. Our intention in including them was to show that passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) and the inclusion of machine learning with PAM is becoming a more well-established scientific method for studying animals without impacting their behavior, and can be done in a low-cost, scalable way. This provides an introduction to the bioGraphic article and how the author believed Haikubox fits with these efforts. We would be happy to fix the wording if it is found to be misleading.

We included the Github page for anyone wishing to check the open source BirdNET project.

We listed the unbiased Haikubox reviews that were posted in birding magazines (Audubon Magazine, Birdwatching Magazine), news stories about Haikubox (Axios, Sarasota Herald Tribune), and WIRED articles which included Haikubox. The original WIRED review was in no way routine coverage -- it was selected for review by the reporter who then independently tested it. In the huge consumer electronics market, very few products are selected for testing by WIRED, so we believe it is notable that it was not only selected, but received a high rating, something we did not tout in the Wikipedia article. We also believe that it is not routine to be included in an even more selective group of products that were so highly considered, they were endorsed for their annual Wish List.

Please note that we had no input into the content of any of these reviews or news articles.

We chose not to include articles, blogs, mention in a recent book about bird conservation, or reviews posted by individual Haikubox customers, feeling that they did not meet Wikipedia's standards. Had we included them, the REFBOMB notation would have been justified. Instead, we included only those in notable, reputable, independent sources.

We again thank you for considering this during the deletion review process, and would be happy to answer any additional questions. We are committed to improving our Wikipedia entry and will update it with notable new information and publications as they are released. Dascyllus (talk) 22:37, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Who is "we"? Oaktree b (talk) 02:46, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
their user page has a disclosed COI Andre🚐 02:53, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Wired and the USA Today sources seem fine, the rest helps. Looks like it's at GNG already. Oaktree b (talk) 15:27, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 17:06, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:24, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep article needs cleanup but not unfixable. Also I don't think it's WP:REFBOMB otherwise Not Just Bikes would appear in WP:AFD by now.

Jothefiredragon (talk) 04:30, 12 January 2024 (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.