Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blogmint


 * 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. Consensus is for deletion. North America1000 22:50, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Blogmint

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not only have searches simply found published-republished PR advertising, we have established as is that Indian news publications literally have a "pay-for" news therefore cannot be taken confidently as actual news, especially when such publications will sometimes literally list something suggesting it was republished company advertising; in this case, I'm literally finding only links that advertise the company and that's not surprising considering that's exactly what we have here listed, only contents that ever care to advertise what the company itself would say about itself.
 * Perhaps the worst damning part is the founder himself started an advertising-only account for this article and there's been nothing else since then, aside from some apparent IPs who were, what the contents suggest, company employees. There's literally nothing else to suggest since this all summarizes it, only perhaps the fact the founder also used his account to advertise another past company of his. SwisterTwister   talk  05:04, 15 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete: Standard PR spam. Spamblog sources. Disappointed that they left out "Funding rounds" and a detailed biography of the CEO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jergling (talk • contribs) 20:56, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:PROMO South Nashua (talk) 23:18, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:40, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:41, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:41, 19 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as corporate spam. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:41, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. the only apparent output of this company is press releases.  DGG ( talk ) 21:00, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ″Keep″. Hi.. I am an employee of the company. Wikipedia is an open encyclopedia which is supposed to be informative and exhaustive. What's wrong if the company employees have created this page? Is it informative - YES. Is it promotional - NO. Then why are you creating a ruckus over this? Am extremely disappointed by the person who marked it for deletion. He/She has blatantly said that Indian media is paid.. please note that majority of the links are from India's top business houses - Economic Times, Business Standard, The Hindu and these journalists meet the founders of the companies before printing stuffs. So, let's not be biased just coz it's Indian firm. Please google blogmint on your own and judge if others are talking about it or not.


 * Blogmint is leading Asia-based influencer marketing firm amongst the top 3 in at least two countries - India and Indonesia. Here's a link to a leading US based marketing research firm. Please see that Blogmint is listed amongst the top 50 platforms globally - https://lighthouse3.com/the-ultimate-guide-to-influencer-technology-and-trends-for-2017/. If that's no enough, Amazon owned alexa.com shows Blogmint website ranked at number 22,000 globally & in top 2,000 in India.


 * Finally, if you feel adding information on the founder helps.. please let us know and we will add it. It wasn't added coz it would be classified as promotional. Also, please feel free to remove anything that you feel is promotional. However, don't point finger that it's a fake company as then you are defeating the genesis of Wikipedia - a global open encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.179.142.229 (talk) 08:23, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Welcome to Wikipedia! While we very much appreciate your input and perspective, you should know that there are a number of guidelines that we use in order to judge as to whether or not an article is kept or deleted. Just speaking in regards to the articles for deletion process (where you're at right now), we typically use Wikipedia's verifiability policy and notability guidelines. Specifically, in this discussion here, we would cite and use Wikipedia's notability guidelines on organizations and companies to make a determination based off of what the community deems notable (minus other relevant guidelines as necessary, of course). I understand that you're new and that you really want to have an article on Wikipedia about the company you work for, but this process and the decisions made with the articles that go through this process - are made in reflection of these policies and guidelines. If you have any questions, please feel free to message me on my talk page by clicking here. Again, I welcome you to Wikipedia and I'll be happy to answer any questions you have - just follow the link if you need any help :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   08:34, 20 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete: Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. It seems to be TOOSOON for this company. Contrary to claim made in article that it was founded in 2013, this article confirms that it was founded in January 2015.
 * Unrelated comment: I've stopped reading nomination rationale these days as they at times seem to be waste of time and totally unhelpful given the copy-paste nature. Please stop generalising and write subject-specific rationale and keep it as short and precise as possible. Anup   [Talk]  00:27, 21 November 2016 (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.