Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ClickInsurance


 * 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. Black Kite (talk) 23:27, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

ClickInsurance

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH. The only source offered, a video in French, appears to be an WP:SPS; it's certainly not a recognized news source. I was unable to find better sources by Googling, include searching news and other sources. The author of the article appears to be an WP:SPA. Msnicki (talk) 00:26, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:28, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:28, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 13 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete: No evidence of notability found for this comparison site. Fails WP:NWEB, WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 06:11, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. The source is not self-published (TVA is a major Quebec TV network) but a search for refs establishes its existence only. Searching for the French name of the company ("ClicAssure") doesn't help. Hairhorn (talk) 12:28, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. While the above arugments are compelling, a short google search has yielded the following (although they are in French):
 * Radio-Canada TV show Entrée principale
 * Radio X
 * La Presse
 * Protégez-vous
 * Quebecor publications (not affiliated with the company):
 * Journal de Québec
 * Canoe.ca
 * Salut, Bonjour (only article currently cited)


 * The article needs to be cleaned up, to be sure, but I don't think deleting it will help consumers in the least. There's a lot of good information in there. -  Sweet Nightmares  17:09, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep : I made some changes to the page and add the sources. The text is informational and is written with a neutral point of view. --WilliamCloutier (talk) 13:36, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a non-notable company. Even if it has press coverage then that coverage should say something useful. If one checks the statements being backed with citations, they are so mundane that they deserve to be deleted because they only establish that this organization is, in fact, a typical insurance provider and give no depth at all to the description of the organization.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  18:58, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The sources do say interesting things about the company, which isn't actually a "typical insurance provider"--in fact, it's not an insurance provider at all. The problem is, since I appear to be in the minority here, why improve it if it's just going to get deleted? Surely there exists good content on the Radio-Canada show, but apparently the episode isn't available online. Radio X's clip talking about the role of these kinds of companies driving insurance prices down in Quebec looks to be promising, and Protégez-vous indicates some problems with the service that I'd add in, as well. However, the former is not working on my computer right now and again, why bother wasting my time listening to it if the article is just going to get deleted by people who--with all due respect--are unfamiliar with the subject matter? -  Sweet Nightmares  00:15, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The sources may say interesting things but the article is not reflecting this. Perhaps some of this content could be moved to an article on this general kind of company, rather than this article about this particular brand. In that way, the research already done would be kept and more accessible.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  13:45, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * 'Delete fails WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:NWEB and, per nom, set up by an SPA. I really don't see why on earth we would need an article about an insurance comparison website which appears to have only two staff and be available only in Quebec unless it's done something super-notable, which it appears not to have done. 02:23, 22 August 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdventurousMe (talk • contribs)
 * 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.