Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xpert Times

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. ✗plicit 12:45, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Xpert Times[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Xpert Times (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable, with no relevant, reliable sources. Speedy delete may apply. BoraVoro (talk) 09:39, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article has the sources with news and reliable sources with ISNI authority control. It don't need to apply speedy deletion. Anjalijk (talk) 10:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)— Anjalijk (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Reliable Sources, relevant Authority Control. No need to delete Ukmathura (talk) 11:05, 18 May 2023 (UTC)— Ukmathura (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Speedy delete as not notable and salt: Fails GNG. Blatant LTA and sockpuppetry. Fancy Refrigerator (talk) 14:49, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
explain why you think so 110.235.234.133 (talk) 10:11, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's a blog. which is non notable. There isn't really much else to say. TheInsatiableOne (talk) 10:29, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It contains syndicated, poorly-written or machine-written gruel solely existing to get ad-clicks. Nate • (chatter) 20:12, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I looked at one "article" and ohh boy: There are several other top features as well, like self-deposits and self-withdrawals in 24 hours, getting the ID in less than one minute, 24×7 chat service, no registration, no documentation and minimum ID from 100 that makes the platform a unique brand in the industry that is 100% safe and secure. Move over, NYT. The more reliable-seeming sources are merely passing mentions. A few sources seem like blogs themselves. SWinxy (talk) 20:38, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, junk paid placement SEO blog that's been abused on wiki several times. More likely candidate for blacklisting than for an article. Sam Kuru (talk) 17:21, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Non-notable website, References looks like Paid Releases. Most of the references covers the Founder and some articles Covers News Website's paid advertising news. Yasal Shahid (talk) 05:39, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. The person who loves reading (talk) 02:05, 25 May 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Xpert_Times&oldid=1156957286"