Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BallerAlert


 * 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 Draftify. – bradv  🍁  20:12, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

BallerAlert

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable, and the nearest thing to independent coverage is the minor negative coverage. The Forbes article is by "a conributor"-- that means, in practice, a press agent.  DGG ( talk ) 06:17, 10 March 2020 (UTC)  DGG ( talk ) 06:17, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 06:20, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 06:20, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete per nom. --MarioGom (talk) 08:51, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Draftify When I approved this out of AfC it hinged on the Forbes article which I didn't realize was an independent contributor not directly affiliated with Forbes, so its premature admission to mainspace is my fault and not the page creators. As such, I'm suggesting it be draftified as to not punish the original page creator. I think it has a chance of being notable, seems as if the blog is quoted quite a bit in many mainstream outlets which in and of itself does not denote notability, but certainly helps its cause and is enough to justify it being allowed to incubate. Sulfurboy (talk) 16:06, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nightfury 10:07, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Draftify I'll go along with the call to draftify for now but I have a lot of reservations on whether this topic will ever have sufficient references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. The test for references is not merely for "independent sources". The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "Independent content" is defined as content that includes original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. Not a single reference meets the criteria so far. <b style="font-family: Courier; color: darkgreen;"> HighKing</b>++ 14:39, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Draftify due to Sulfurboy's explanation. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 06:54, 28 March 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.