Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Find My Kids


 * 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. ✗ plicit  13:23, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Find My Kids

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

Few mentions and nothing significant about this app. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. Govind Ghoshal (talk) 22:25, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2022 March 16.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 22:37, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:54, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – AssumeGoodWraith  (talk &#124; contribs) 23:27, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep and update. The article meets both WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. The name of the application in Где мои дети and it is different from English, which is why we could not find suitable sources. These sources can be used in the article: Kommersant, RBK Group, Perm News, Perm News 2 Afisha Daily, Redefine, Rusbase, Orenburzhie, Mail.ru Group, Chita iText and many more. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 08:57, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Upd. I don’t know where the comments come from that there are only mentions in the articles. The sources contain information about the company and the application, and the links themselves are from the list of reliable Wikipedia sources. Also, Google gives 61 million results about the app. Thus, there are other links in the search engine results that you can use in the article. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 07:48, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:GOOGLEHITS is not a useful tool in determining notability. I admit I don't have a background on the reliability of Russian-language sources, but they don't read as reliable to me. SWinxy (talk) 15:21, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Kommersant, RBK Group, Afisha, Mail.ru etc. are among the reliable sources. I even personally took part in the discussion to add Kommersant to the list of reliable sources. Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 18:01, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwaiiplayer (talk) 12:48, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. No valid reason for deletion. Flowingmind (talk) 18:01, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - the sources cited above are mentions only. Still fails WP:SIGCOV which requires more in-depth coverage. 2001:8003:7D11:6600:A4F2:7BF0:9E1E:F729 (talk) 11:51, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable. Sources look like review farms. One doesn't appear to be related, and two are the Google Play Store. Sources brought up by Գարիկ Ավագյան (except mail.ru) are also not in-depth enough for me. SWinxy (talk) 23:48, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete - all low quality sources CT55555 (talk) 17:23, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete The refs all seem to come from review sites, which is unfortunate as its a new type of product that is probably never existed before in the history of mankind. It could do with a whole bunch of academic sources.   scope_creep Talk  16:09, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Have you checked the sources I added up here? Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 18:06, 2 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:50, 7 April 2022 (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.