Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BetterMed


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. If someone editor wants to work on this article in Draft space and submit it for AFC review, contact me or WP:REFUND Liz Read! Talk! 23:54, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

BetterMed

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:NCORP. Sources are press releases and mentions. CNN coverage is not in-depth. My WP:BEFORE did not show a presence of NCORP-compliant sourcing. There is seemingly in-depth coverage in the Grit Daily article, but that web page strongly resembles sponsored content and is, in terms of form, a press-release/interview hybrid with the claims obviously being sourced to the company with no outside, journalistic, analysis, scrutiny or contextualization; includes tell-tale promotional verbiage such as What’s next for BetterMed?. —Alalch E. 17:44, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Medicine. —Alalch E. 17:44, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not a PR repository. I concur with the nominator's evaluation of the available sources. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 18:09, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: CNN is a trivial paragraph mention. Rest of the sourcing used is PR. I can't find anything about this organization, there was a string of medical clinics with the same name that was bought out. I don't think it's related to this; rest is entirely PR items that I find. Oaktree b (talk) 19:43, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. Advert for NN company posing as article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  22:04, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. The company doesn't have that much coverage in major outlets but it is very notable. The CNN source alone should be enough to consider it notable. CNN is a reliable source as per Wikipedia guidelines. Evanzoe (talk) 10:45, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * That was already addressed: CNN coverage is not in-depth. It is not in-depth because it only contains one short paragraph about the subject. There's a second paragraph but it is a quote of someone from the company, and that doesn't count. Coverage must he in-depth for a source to count toward notability. There must be multiple such sources, not just one, and there are none. If there is no significant coverage in multiole sources about a company, it is not notable. So it can't be "very notable". It can't be non-notable due to insufficient coverage and very notable at the same time. "Notability" has a specific meaning on Wikipedia. —Alalch E. 12:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify. Given that notability is not ruled out, but there are problems with WP:SIGCOV. Also, the page is new. Suitskvarts (talk) 14:53, 27 December 2023 (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.