Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WatchPayer

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. Tone 19:25, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WatchPayer[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)

The article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:ORGCRIT. The subject lacks multiple independent secondary sources providing significant coverage. The article does not meet WP:SIGCOV // Timothy :: talk 19:07, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 19:07, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:14, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: An article on an online business, featuring uncited promotional prose and detail (text, the photo of a member of staff at work) which seems likely to indicate undisclosed primary sourcing. Leaving that aside, the WatchTarget review and customer reviews are indicative of a company going about its business but searches are not finding evidence of attained notability. AllyD (talk) 11:05, 10 August 2020 (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.