Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helpchat


 * 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. Michig (talk) 06:59, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Helpchat

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. Does not meet GNG. GregJackP  Boomer!   03:31, 16 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. I was going to hold off for a day or two, before nominating this article for deletion myself. As it stands, the only substantive statement made regarding the actual topic of the article is that "Helpchat is chat-based personal assistant app". Everything else is basically PR, and about the company's intentions. This simply isn't sufficient material on which to build an encyclopaedic article, and I can find no real evidence that anything more substantial in the way of useful third-party sourcing exists. Without such sourcing, the subject simply cannot meet our notability guidelines. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:48, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89  (T·E·C) 03:54, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89  (T·E·C) 03:54, 16 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - Per nom, it's just not notable. -- Orduin  Discuss 17:46, 16 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment - (See WP:INDAFD) There are significant coverage in reliable sources (see here). — CutestPenguinHangout 18:18, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * But how many of those sources tell us anything more than what the article already states? Where are the articles that actually review the application? Where are the articles telling us about market share? All you seem to have found is the same recycled PR about the company's future objectives reported in multiple sources - and a rebranding exercise for a product doesn't make it notable. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:26, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * , I saw those, but as noted, they are mainly press releases by the company's PR people. They don't go towards notability.  GregJackP   Boomer!   19:51, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America1000 22:13, 16 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Non-notable company with one ref and a bunch of passing mentions; fails WP:CORP, and looks like yet another promotional article.  Mini  apolis  23:14, 16 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete and salt - Fails WP:CORP and particularly WP:CORPDEPTH, and there's far too much silliness going on for an article of such little magnitude. As it is very likely that the creator will recreate it and cause the same problems, sodium chloride is the prescription here. MSJapan (talk) 05:03, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It is possible but I won't press for a salt yet. SwisterTwister   talk  16:52, 17 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails WP:CORP. Needs multiple non-press release references. shoy (reactions) 13:39, 17 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - Subject have significant coverage in reliable sources but most of published sources are either press releases and reviews which may not be considered as the reliable one. The article also fails WP:CORP. — Cute<b style="color:#00A300">st</b><b style="color:#0A47FF">Penguin</b>Hangout 13:43, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete for now as my searches found nothing aside from this and this. SwisterTwister   talk  16:52, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Per above fails WP:CORP.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:15, 21 August 2015 (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.