Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joy e-bike


 * 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__. Sourcing has been shown to lack sufficient depth Star   Mississippi  18:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Joy e-bike

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

Fails WP:NCORP, WP:SIRS, WP:CORPDEPTH, Refs are routine coverage.  scope_creep Talk  00:36, 19 January 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious (talk) 09:40, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, Transportation,  and Gujarat.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  05:37, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep - based on coverage meets GNG. Bikerose (talk) 20:09, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I will go through the references this weekend, the first 14 anyway.   scope_creep Talk  15:21, 26 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete/Draftify None of the sources in the article nor ones I could find via Google provide NCORP coverage on the company. There were some reviews I found of the companies products that may or may not meet NCORP that may make an article possible if it focused on the companies products but the article at this stage would need a fundamental rewrite to achieve that. If someone wants to do that, draftify, otherwise delete. Jumpytoo Talk 22:04, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep There are ample coverage on Google that talks about the subject, which meet the criteria set by WP:NCORP, WP:SIRS, and WP:CORPDEPTH. However, it seems that the sources provided by Jumpytoo are not used on the page.Wakukapu (talk) 18:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
 * This editor is a WP:SPA, probably from the company.   scope_creep Talk  18:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Comment Lets examine the articles references:
 * Ref 1 This is a press-release. Fails WP:SIRS.
 * Ref 2 This routine coverage. Share price increase. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH, trivial coverage.
 * Ref 3 This is press release. Fails WP:SIRS
 * Ref 4 Growth figures.Fails WP:CORPDEPTH, trivial coverage.
 * Ref 5 This is press release. Fails WP:SIRS
 * Ref 6 This is press release. Fails WP:SIRS
 * Ref 7 This fails WP:ORGIND and its a press-release
 * Ref 8 This is a press-release and fails WP:ORGIND.
 * Ref 9 No author, no-byline. Fails WP:SIRS
 * Ref 10 "Experience the thrill of eco-friendly and efficient travel with this remarkable electric scooter!" This is a PR and fails WP:SIRS
 * Ref 11 Same ref as above. Fails WP:SIRS
 * Ref 12 Another press-release. Fails WP:SIRS
 * Ref 13 This is PR. No byline. Its WP:PUFF. Fails WP:SIRS
 * Ref 14 This is PR from a press-release. Fails WP:SIRS

Not a single reference in the first two blocks of reference to pass WP:SIRS. They references are junk, which is what you expect from a brand-new startup.  scope_creep Talk  18:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Premature as of now If it's as notable as claimed, it will get better references, satisfy WP:NCORP and then can be recreated. MaskedSinger (talk) 07:19, 2 February 2024 (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.