Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uknowva

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. Sandstein 07:33, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uknowva[edit]

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

Fails WP:NWEB as written. No third-party reliable sources. PROD contested by author so here we are. shoy (reactions) 14:01, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:16, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:16, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:45, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Source searches are not providing significant coverage; fails WP:WEBCRIT / WP:GNG. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:48, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Shoy. We have added all the external sources that we have currently and since it is a growing product in popularity we don't have many sources yet. However, the sources that we have provided, I assure you, are completely legit and properly sanctioned. I'd prefer you do not delete the page, but if you ave to and before you do, I'd appreciate it if you could tell me how we can prevent the page from getting deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poojamenon27 (talk • contribs) 06:53, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:18, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The given references are predominantly primary, with just some start-up product coverage from 3rd parties. My searches are finding nothing better than the usual listings, so failing WP:CORPDEPTH. (Regarding the above comments claiming growing product sales and use, it is worth noting WP:CRYSTAL, and there is probably a WP:COI that requires to be declared on the article.) AllyD (talk) 06:39, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- self-cited promotional material. Not notable yet. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:09, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment -- I trimmed the article a bit of "product brochure" and self-cited and / or trivial details, and there's just nothing there. I cannot find any sources at all. No sources have been presented during the AfD process. This may be WP:A7 territory. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:04, 11 August 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.