Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Utopia Deals

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. Not shown to have coverage to meet WP:NCORP requirements. RL0919 (talk) 13:44, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Utopia Deals

[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)

Promotional company article. Bbarmadillo (talk) 09:04, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Bbarmadillo (talk) 09:04, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Bbarmadillo (talk) 09:04, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:01, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as there is no clear example of WP:NPOV violation in the article. Article also has more than enough sources to meet WP:GNG. RealKnockout (talk) 21:08, 12 December 2021 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: RealKnockout (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 10:24, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 10:45, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (or draftify? user appears to be making good-faith efforts to improve the article). More or less a press release as written. Citing (talk) 17:49, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Could you kindly state examples of the article violating WP:NPOV? Thanks. RealKnockout (talk) 02:01, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is this one-paragraph article is indistinguishable from a blurb that would appear on a company profile page from an online retailer. It is almost entirely sales figures and a list of what products it offers and where to buy them. That isn't enough for an encyclopedia stub. It could be made into something more, but as it stands it's very promotional.Citing (talk) 15:38, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the marketplaces they operate on and added manufacturing information. Is that fine? RealKnockout (talk) 17:34, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It still needs some work. I looked around and the article on Daraz may be a helpful model in terms of content and sourcing (assuming there are enough in-depth sources to improve the article -- I am not familiar enough with this topic to find more sources though). Citing (talk) 18:01, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I get what you mean now. I definitely have enough sources to do that (especially due to how long the BBC Urdu article is), I will try to rewrite the article later today. RealKnockout (talk) 13:25, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bobherry Talk Edits 01:59, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete - via WP:G11.-KH-1 (talk) 01:28, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Entirely promotional as pointed out by Citing above. WP:NCORP requires multiple sources (at least two) of deep or significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "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. Most of the references talk about the CEO or the fact that the company topped some charts for sales, but nothing that could could as in-depth information. None of the references in the article meet the criteria. I have been unable to find any references that meet NCORP criteria, topic fails WP:NCORP. HighKing 20:27, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The sources only mention the founder in the title, the content they contain is almost exclusively about the company. Furthermore, consider reading the BBC Urdu article with Google Translate. RealKnockout (talk) 17:35, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They do more than mention the CEO, they are repeating and regurgitating his quotes and interviews with no "Independent Content" (as per ORGIND). Here's a quickie analysis of the sources.

This from BOL News is based entirely on an interview with the CEO, fails ORGIND
Very short article on BBC (a puff piece), all of the information (including the tweet) is based entirely on stuff provided by the CEO or the company. Fails ORGIND
In May 2021, in an attempt to cash in on the news that Amazon had added Pakistan to their list of sellers and currencies, the topic company and their CEO went into promotion overdrive starting with a small interview on 16th May. That is why from 19th May there are several articles all repeating the same "facts". This is not news, it is marketing. None of the articles such as the ones from Startup Pakistan, the Urdo BBC the piece, Technologistan, Pakistan Observer, Extra Mile Pakistan or Naya Daur are useful for the purposes of establishing notability.

Having searched, I cannot see anything else about the company that doesn't rely entirely on interviews with the CEO or generic description which is copied from the website. HighKing 18:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:INTERVIEW states that a good amount of interviews (from reliable sources) showcases that the the topic is receiving good attention and could make it notable. The company interview with BOL News (A major Pakistani news agency), BBC Urdu (the BBC itself, and the interview doesn't appear short by any means), and the 3 paragraphs on PT by Pakistan Today (another Pakistani news agency) means that the company alone being able to secure interviews with non-niche agencies is contribution to notability. A reprint of the interview facts would also mean further relevance and notability? I think this lets the article marginally fit WP:GNG. RealKnockout (talk) 13:34, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Response Two reasons. First, WP:INTERVIEW is neither policy nor guideline but an essay and therefore cannot be used to "overrule" applicable policies/guidelines. It is also geared towards interviewing people for that person's notability, not companies or organizations. That said, the Notability section helpfully points out acceptable elements which may assist in establishing notability such as "a depth of preperation", "the interview material" being "interspersed with the interviewer's own secondary analysis and thoughts" and presenting "their own evidence challenging claims" being made and "offering their own conclusions". This sentiment is very much in line with WP:ORGIND and the requirement for "Independent Content" which I've pointed out above. Also, eacch reference must meet all of NCORP's criteria. For example, if an executive provides in-depth information on the company (which would meet WP:CORPDEPTH criteria) but the journalist fails to provide their own opinon/analysis/etc (failing WP:ORGIND) then that reference still fails NCORP criteria and cannot be used to assist in establishing notability. If you're implying that any of the sources you claim are good in that respect, please point out which paragraph. Secondly, the applicable guideline is not GNG as you say (see the WP:SNG section of GNG), but WP:NCORP. HighKing 20:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The first interview by BOL News contains a fairly long segment on the company and the CEO plus a bit of background information. There is a YouTube video there of the interview which you can see. I will examine the interview later and translate anything which would show it is appropriate for notability (it is in the Urdu language) Together with the BBC Urdu piece and the other interviews supporting it probably meets notability crtieria. Also, my mistake, I typed GNG accidentally, I had meant to reference WP:NCORP. RealKnockout (talk) 01:11, 8 January 2022 (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.