Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DeepLearning.AI


 * 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__. Liz Read! Talk! 03:29, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

DeepLearning.AI

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

Smells of spam, wonderful spam. Cited sources are prehistoric, nothing not self published floats to the surface. Ihave removed some of the mor ridiculous 'content' from this article, btw. TheLongTone (talk) 16:34, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CptViraj (talk) 16:54, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:16, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:16, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:16, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Websites.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  20:25, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete only passing mentions, not enough reliable independent coverage. --BoraVoro (talk) 09:56, 14 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep I added some further references on notability. The OP of the AFD very much doesn't use the neutral language that they envision for the article itself (furthermore typos). There is no issue with the article, the subject is of note, and most sources are from 2023, one is from 2017 when the program was founded, hardly "prehistoric". 191.102.59.2 (talk)
 * replying to I added some further references on notability. Seeing on the contributions, you haven't edited the nominated article. Toadette  (Happy holiday!) 08:28, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:04, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep – Article is of dubious notability, There are multiple hits on Google news, and about that the subject corporated with Coursera and AWS to launch programs. Beyond that are mentions. It is unclear whether the sources passes WP:GNG or not. Toadette  (Happy holiday!) 08:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete Written like an advertisement and it doesn't seem notable. Of the sources, one predates the course, two are just primary sources for course description, one is a pseudonymous review, and the Lewkowicz and Lucariello articles are written like a press release. A quick search doesn't turn up anything better. I don't see this article ever being anything other than an advertisement and/or a reproduction of the course descriptions. Ligaturama (talk) 08:38, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bungle (talk • contribs) 14:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge Although DeepLearning.ai is not significant in and of itself, it is a notable course within Coursera. It may find a better place as a shortened summary on the Coursera page. Ardent Vim (talk) 11:54, 27 December 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C50:1900:116B:ED5F:16C5:82CF:2421 (talk)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete as failing WP:NCORP. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 16:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:NCORP. There's no significant coverage about it online. Sgubaldo (talk) 22:31, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete None of the sourcing meets GNG/NCORP criteria for establishing notability.  HighKing++ 14:50, 2 January 2024 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.