Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Churchix


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 02:26, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Churchix

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Carefully crafted paid article (per Conflict of interest/Noticeboard) that fails a number of criteria. Churchix is a division of Face-Six LLC, and so fails WP:PRODUCT as it's parent company has questionable notability. Sourcing is a major issue, as while the article has many citations, most of them cover the field of facial recongition and make no mention of Churchix itself, and even those that due only mention it in passing or as part of a list. These failures qualify the article for deletion per WP:MILL and WP:PROMOTION as Churchix is not individually notable. SamHolt6 (talk) 16:50, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  M assiveYR   ♠  16:52, 12 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - promotional, thus failing WP:NOT. The usual paid editor tactic of putting in dozens of sorta-related refs doesn't help Smallbones( smalltalk ) 17:00, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - but rewrite. The article is heavily promotional, but there's considerable press coverage. Mostly negative. "Skipping church - Facial recognition could be tracking you" - Washington Post. "Face recognition software knows when you are skipping church services." - Engadget It's notable as a Big Brother system. The article needs a rewrite and a "controversy" section. John Nagle (talk) 19:18, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:REFOVERKILL applies here. The sources, as listed above are routine coverage and what tips this over the edge is the terms of use violation. jcc (tea and biscuits) 17:00, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete clearly promotional coverage is routine lacks significant coverage and fails WP:PRODUCT.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 04:35, 14 September 2017 (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.