Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aasaanjobs.com

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. Overwhelming consensus to delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:38, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aasaanjobs.com

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

Recreation of a page recently deleted via WP:PROD. Sources listed include Bloomberg directory listing (which is non RS for notability) and information about funding. Significant RS cannot be found to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. Created by Special:Contributions/Prashant32 with no other contributions. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:30, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:30, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:31, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:44, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete Seems like article written by none other than founders themselves (or influenced), It will not be surprise if the founder seeks their own page from sometime now by building this page for their base. Highest degree of non-notable promotional content. From company Promotional writing of an article to references used for press or news coverage. References are PR exercise of company or clearly influenced by the company the way it is being covered by media. If we have to make a Wikipedia page for being an encyclopedia in this manner. It will be flooded with thousands of worldwide funding company daily. wikipedia is not a portfolio or directory of such company.Light2021 (talk) 20:45, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have created this page to contribute to wikipedia community. I love to write about the growing companies in India. I am following this company from many years now so I thought to create the wiki page to share the information about it. I am new to wikipedia so I request you to help me to understand the things which are missing in the article. I will make the changes as early as possible. I am doing more research about the company which will add value to the readers.Prashant32 (talk) 13:52, 25 October 2016 (IST)

Delete and salt as literally a restarted advertisement deleted a sheer 4 days ago and with the same blatant information only existing to advertise the company and its services (the same can be said about the sources, which are notorious "pay-for" websites), certainly none of it becomes substance and nor would it be considering the clear advertising motivations here. SwisterTwister talk 20:57, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What is missing? I would like to share some reference to clear my point. The below pages are created by using similar information. Can you point out what is the difference in the article that written by me and the pages shown below?Prashant32 (talk) 12:58, 26 October 2016 (IST)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naukri.com https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babajob.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.75.54.254 (talk) 07:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That is the most important reason, such junk and spam are being created on Wikipedia, based on other successful startup model or copying them the way they are written. You are missing the Notability of the company itself that Naukri.com has no problem with. It is not about how you write an article. This is created only for promotional purposes and nothing else. This is encyclopedia not Blog-Post or PR distribution network Light2021 (talk) 07:36, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lacking sufficient non-trivial coverage from reliable sources. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This one I would agree has nothing in-depth out there and the majority of the news is simply funding - nothing in detail about the company, just the funding. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:42, 27 October 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.