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. Can be draftified or userfied via
WP:REFUND (not by me). Sandstein 10:45, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Draftify: There are sufficient resources in several of the references to give this page notability. However, the page needs significant improvement. --
Whiteguru (
talk) 10:25, 3 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Randykitty (
talk) 17:28, 14 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete.FalconK's nomination says "Promotional page with no evidence of notability", and that just about sums it up. Contrary to what Whiteguru and the IP editor have said, neither the sources cited in the article nor the links given by the IP editor go anywhere towards showing notability. They include a lot of pages with just brief mentions of Tunedly, mere announcements of appointments or other business moves, unambiguously promotional or otherwise non-independent sources, and so on. Most of them don't even look remotely like substantial coverage in reliable independent sources, and the few that at first glance look as though they may be, turn out on closer examination not to be. (For example, looking one of them which at first looked as though it might be useful I found that half way down the page it referred to Tunedly as "we". I then discovered other reasons why it wasn't an acceptable source.)
There is clearly consensus that the page should not remain as an article, and the only point open to question is whether it should be draftified or simply deleted. Draftification is fine for an article that has too many faults to be acceptable as an article in its present state but is on a notable topic, but here we are dealing with a topic with no evidence of notability, so there is no justification for draftifying the article.
JBW (
talk) 17:07, 17 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Draftify per above. Needs some work, but I can see this being an article. jp×g 06:17, 18 January 2021 (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.