Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ratehub.ca

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. Scope creep's source analysis has not been rebutted. Sandstein 10:32, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ratehub.ca

[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)

Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND. Non-notable org. Brochure article. scope_creep^Talk 18:19, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:23, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:23, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:23, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I would say that the subject is notable. Company has 112 employees, $8M in annual revenue, coverage in multiple news sources. FinanceManToo (talk) 02:05, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Lets look at the refs:
1. Company overview, own site, primary, can't be used to establish notability.
2. Linkedin. non-rs.
3. Crunchbase profile. primary. can't be used to establish notability.
4. More advertising. Fails WP:ORGCRIT
5. Press release. Fails WP:ORGIND. The company supplies their domain. Not independent of the company.
6. Appearance on Canadian dragons den. Could be notable on its own.
7. Marketing will be critical to getting the RateHub name out there.” More advertising.
8. Press release. Funding news, visitor numbers. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH, standard notices.
9. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH, standard notices.
10. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH, standard notices.
11. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH, standard notices.
12. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. of the expansions, acquisitions, mergers, sale, or closure of the business
13. Press release. Fails WP:ORGIND
14, 15, 16 all the same. Funding news and incidental on another company.

Seems to have only single viable reference, appearing on Canadian version of Dragons Den. scope_creep^Talk 09:39, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I had another look. It is the founder of the company that appeared on the Canadian version of Dragons Den. So it is non-specific as at that point as the company was not created. scope_creep^Talk 10:29, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete with thanks to scope_creep for nominating as this was on my list of future articles to nominate for AfD. Nearly all of the press coverage, to the extent it exists and is either from non-qualifying reliable sources, is non-qualifying trivial coverage thus failing WP:SIGCOV. Crucially, though, there are no, reliable independent sources covering this company in a notable and substantive way to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. Thus, it fails both tests—WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH. Doug Mehus T·C 02:17, 12 January 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.