Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allied Wallet (4th nomination)


 * 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. Randykitty (talk) 20:56, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Allied Wallet
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The topic fails WP:GNG. The few references used are mere press releases. Moreover, there are regular WP:COI cases recorded. Mendypendy (talk) 15:20, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

A look at first and 2nd previous deletions reveals that the page already qualifies for Speedy delete WP:G4 (Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion). It was deleted and then recreated again and updated severally by editors with Wp:COI cases.Mendypendy (talk) 15:37, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Still remains a COI mess, and the paid editing has made it worse. It continues to read as an ADVERT, and I felt the 2015 keep decision was ill-made based on a short period of trying to keep the COI under control that seemed to evaporate the moment the keep was sealed on nom #3. It hasn't established new notability since then outside of things like their CEO donations that are of no interest to this article.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 17:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Pinging who accepted this at WP:AFC. ~Kvng (talk) 15:39, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete I couldn't find any convincing features of the topic in the references used. COI issue is also worrisome. Germcrow (talk) 18:31, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete This fails WP:CORP. No valid sources on ground. Laosilika (talk) 11:34, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:NCORP. Promotional.  scope_creep Talk  16:05, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - Not because I apparently accepted it at AfC in 2014, but more because of the good references discussed in depth at the third AfD, where the result was "keep". I do not find the present version of the article promotional. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:22, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Most if not all the references i gathered from GNEWS were PR pieces. Nothing from any secondary source. PlotHelpful (talk) 12:38, 1 February 2019 (UTC)


 * 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.