Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wistiki

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. Largely based on HighKing's source analysis. Legoktm (talk) 05:50, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wistiki

[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)

Not meeting CORP. I can only find PR type pieces about the product launch or blog discussions. The company went into bankruptcy proceedings early during the pandemic, I'm not sure they've recovered either. I don't see any RS in French either. Oaktree b (talk) 17:00, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Oaktree b (talk) 17:00, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. Springnuts (talk) 17:07, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and France. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:50, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets WP:ORGIN and WP:SIRS. Here are links from significant, reliable sources; 1 2 3.Malaysian Burger (talk) 15:17, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP criteria is applied. or significant sources containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. None of the references in the article not those mentioned by Malaysian Burger above meet the criteria. For example, the Masculin source is a simple summary of the founding story (which can be read in multiple difference sources, always the same, and on their website) and a description of the product. There is no "Independent Content" about the company. The Le Parisien source is based entirely on an interview with the founders and is a "puff piece" with no "Independent Content". And the Objetconnecte source is a summary of their latest crowdfunding with no "Independent Content" and I consider it to be another puff profile gushing effusively with praise and admiration. Topic fails GNG/NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 14:00, 27 February 2023 (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.