Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hungry Hub

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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:29, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hungry Hub[edit]

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

Non-notable reservation service in Thailand that was created 4 years ago. Nothing notable to look at, and the sourcing most certainly doesn't meet the new and improved as of today WP:NCORP. All press repeats, inclusion in lists, non-substantial coverage, or lacking intellectual independence. None of them are exactly RS, and there is no claim to significance made, so I had A7'd it after it was tagged as such by SamHolt6. Someone took it to DRV and while I don't think any of the sourcing brings it out of A7 territory (none of it is really RS), I'm fine with the community reviewing that decision, and I think AfD is a better forum for that than DRV. I support deletion here, and this is not simply a procedural nomination. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not notable. Acnetj (talk) 21:40, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Repeating what I said at the DRV: the article does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject. All the article said was that this is a startup in the restaurant reservation space. There's a bunch of sources, but none of them look like they meet WP:RS. Most of them are blogs, interviews, rehashed press releases, directory listings, etc. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:46, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, and also as native advertising apparently created in violation of our terms of use. As far as I can see, this is not a Wikipedia article but an advertisement masquerading as one. I've asked Rusboot to clarify his/her paid editor status (here), but there's been no reply. That's not a good sign, I fear. On the other hand, it's hard to imagine that a paid editor would be dumb enough to request this process, which will pretty much ensure that the company will not have a Wikipedia article for several years at least. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:14, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Rusboot has now disclosed his/her paid editor status in relation to some articles. I don't know if that disclosure applies to this one too. Rusboot, can you clarify? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:23, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. As usual, the sources cited by the article are not entirely about Hungry Hub and instead focus on the wider topic of online reservation services. This is a mjor issue per the new NCORP policy. I also stand by my initial A7 tag as the article still fails to assert any claim to significance. Delete.--SamHolt6 (talk) 00:05, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:17, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:17, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:17, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per all the above arguments, the sources are at best Churnalism and those that aren't are undisguised advertising. Dom from Paris (talk) 17:49, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete with prejudice. Spam. Guy (Help!) 17:53, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not meet WP:GNG requirements. WP:artspam. Creator did a good job of creating native advertising. If only we could turn him to the light side.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 11:13, 28 March 2018 (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.