Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HappyBird


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 11:51, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

HappyBird

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete- False claims and copyright infringement Fails to explain why page can be included as an encyclopedic subject. Seems to be promotional in nature than encyclopedic value. With further research it is clear that manufacturer of company is ANGEL (https://www.iamhappybird.com/) where page creator has listed Digital Angel (http://www.digitalangel.com/) of United States which can be copyright infringement as they are two different companies. Ireneshih (talk) 11:33, 30 January 2014 (UTC) 
 * comment Copyright infringement is not handled through AfD as a rule, nor do I see any copyright infringement here. What text is being improperly copied and where? Nor do I see any "false claims". If there is an error in the name of the company, that should be corrected. Is "Angel" simply short for "Digital Angel" or is it an error or are the two related in some way? we should find out if possible, but none of those are reasons for deletion. The article as it stands is stating apparent facts, not making promotional claims. It may be that those facts do not have sufficient relaible sources supporting them, in which case we should correct that if possible, and if that is not possible, THEN and only then would deletion be appropriate., have you gone through the steps at WP:BEFORE prior to the nom? DES (talk) 14:58, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * follow up The page https://www.iamhappybird.com/terms/ lists the firm's legal name as "Angel Digital Pty Ltd". So does the page , and I don't find any page on the iamhappybird.com that uses just ANGEL. Where exactly does this form appear? DES (talk) 15:07, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete 2 of 3 references are press releases and the other one may be as well. Fails to come close to demonstrating [WP:Notability]].  Even if notable, promotional tone suggest WP:STARTOVER may be best.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  03:46, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete, as per davidwr. No copyright infringement as far as I can see, though. --Yamla (talk) 15:03, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep This page should stay, it is about a company which manufactures devices which are intended to facilitate student and especially designed to replace there school bags.
 * Check references which further elaborate it
 * http://www.independentschoolparent.com/health/help-protect-your-childs-back-with-a-digital-backpack
 * http://www.mobile-ent.biz/development/android/the-digital-schoolbag-that-banishes-back-pain/042817
 * it has been discussen on BBC, http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01ph4pc
 * Olexazale (talk) 15:29, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Procedurally extended until 18:30 17 February 2014 (UTC) due to improper original listing.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs) 18:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment regarding the 3 references above:  1 is already on the article.  The video is unavailable to me.  A link to a working copy or transcript would be very helpful.  I have commented on these references and on the 3 existing references in the article on the article's talk page. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  18:53, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment There are at least two sources - one that is in the article and one that is not but which is mentioned above - which may help demonstrate notability, provided they are truly independent and reliable. Unfortunately, both include quotes from a press release and both seem promotional in tone and purpose.  The video source listed above is "to be determined" as I am unable to see it and do not have access to a transcript.  See the article talk page for details.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  18:53, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. — Mike  moral  ♪♫  20:11, 10 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2014 February 11.  — cyberbot I  Notify Online 01:53, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * This may be a mistake, as I included it in Articles for deletion/Log/2014 February 10 in the cleanup yesterday. I will notify  (the bot owner) on his talk page shortly.  I have no objections to a further procedural delay of the close until Feb. 18th.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  18:12, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:36, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:36, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete, article reads like advertising copy, and the company doesn't have the substantial third-party coverage I'd expect from a firm that met WP:CORP. Lankiveil (speak to me) 02:59, 16 February 2014 (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.