Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hipi

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. (non-admin closure) ASTIG️🙃 _{(ICE-T • ICE CUBE)} 12:45, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hipi[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)

None of the news is significant to prove notability. Lordofhunter (talk) 05:45, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Software, and India. Lordofhunter (talk) 05:45, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

totally agree 77.251.59.79 (talk) 17:09, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Hipi is One of the largest platforms like Likee, TikTok, Triller (app)...etc. for content creators. Articl has numerous sources which has significantly covered it and many sources available onlineJasmin dsilva (talk) 09:22, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I request you to share sources, being largest doesn't make it notable. Lordofhunter (talk) 10:36, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One of the largest platforms like Likee, TikTok, Triller (app)...etc. for content creators- WP:POPULARITY, being largest does not mean that notability is met, which is what is being evaluated here. many sources available online- can you link any that meet SIGCOV? Thanks. VickKiang (talk) 08:43, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Can found many reliable news sources about the subject which can pass WP:GNG like Business Toady, Gadgets360, Live Hindustan, Amar Ujala, The Economic Times, Business Insider, The Indian Express and other you can find in google search. (Note - All sources are reliable, independent and not press released) 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 11:18, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment All the sources which you shared are announcements and launch news based on PR Material. The majority of your links have the same content with the same date (14th, 15th Aug) and The Economic Times is again not independent, as no independent comment by any journalist. Nothing other than PR, so fails notability. Lordofhunter (talk) 15:30, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:40, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete most of the links shared are not RS, and I don't see GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 15:40, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would not agree with the fact the sources are not reliable, indeed it is not passing notability. Indian news sources' notability is not much defined in Wikipedia, and it doesn't mean it is not reliable. Lordofhunter (talk) 14:43, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They are in fact, please see here: [1]. None of what you've shared seems to be on this list. Oaktree b (talk) 14:20, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As per WP:RSP: A source's absence from the list does not imply that it is any more or less reliable than the sources that are present. Absence just means its reliability hasn't been the subject of serious questioning yet. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence... For a source to be added to this list, editors generally expect two or more significant discussions about the source's reliability in the past, or an uninterrupted request for comment on the source's reliability that took place on the reliable sources noticeboard. So sources not being on RSP could be top-notch, generally reliable, marginally reliable, generally unreliable, or blatantly non-RS sites. But in this case they're obviously non-WP:SIGCOV IMO, so the reliability question is secondary IMHO, even if the sources are all reliable SIGCOV still is failed. VickKiang (talk) 20:43, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. All of the references in the article does not contribute to WP:NPRODUCT or WP:GNG, being a collection of standard notices, routine announcements mainly on new platforms, hosts, and launches, or interviews. The references my WP:BEFORE found, unfortunately, appear to fail SIGCOV, e.g., 1, 2, 3. None of the references LordVoldemort728 linked contribute to notability. Those are: a minor announcement on platform launch that is promotional (Zee5 aims to empower India by giving the audiences a platform where their talent...), launch of a new platform mainly being quoted, press release/routine announcement on new launch with a promotional list of app highlights, routine announcement on new launch and Tiktok ban with speculations, i.e., The company hasn't given details about the app, but little direct in-depth commentary, another announcement on 43 million users being upgraded, short announcement on beta rollout of HiPi, a minor video platform, and another reference that is longer but primarily quotes or covering routine product details. None of those references meet WP:SIGCOV, and this topic IMO fails WP:NPRODUCT or WP:GNG. VickKiang (talk) 06:58, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:43, 21 December 2022 (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.