Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karhoo


 * 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 redirect to Daniel Ishag. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:07, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Karhoo

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article has been nominated 3 times for speedy deletion, so I'm taking this here for discussion. Pinging previous decliners and, and nominators  and  (the other nominator was an IP). Adam9007 (talk) 03:16, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  13:33, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  13:33, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete or merge to Daniel Ishag: This is an interesting case. Karhoo is a company that hasn't started operations yet, but has secured VC funding. The notability issue is that every news hit I can find out there is either a reprint of press releases (e.g. Karhoo securing a lease in Manhattan), or consists mostly or entirely of an interview with Daniel Ishag, the founder. In other words, the coverage that we might call significant is not independent, and what remaining portions we might call independent are not significant. If (and that's a big if) there's any significant coverage of Karhoo's VC rounds, then it falls within WP:EVENT, which would counsel deletion here. That this article appears to have been created during a PR push by Karhoo/Ishag's marketing people does not help things. In short we have a service that isn't notable right now (even if it probably will be at some point, WP:XBALL controls). —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 15:08, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment: Of particular note is the absence of any independent significant coverage on Karhoo's media page. While that's not going to be an exhaustive list of coverage, you would expect it to include the best of the best coverage on the company. Even the typical "as seen on" or "as used by" or "as discussed by" section, with a ton of network, publication and business logos—a mainstay of current web design for startups—is not present. That strongly suggests that even Karhoo's own PR people know of no real significant coverage. I'm not saying that should be controlling, but taken with an independent analysis of what's actually out there, we can feel a lot more confident that said analysis is correct. It's just too soon for an article on this subject, like an unreleased movie or a professional sportsperson who hasn't debuted yet. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 17:15, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 17:03, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 17:03, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 17:03, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 17:03, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 17:04, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 17:04, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Redirect The one sentence in the article on the founder is quite sufficient.   There's a major difference between raising money and starting operations. This is a classic case of TOOSOON.  DGG ( talk ) 21:10, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect as questionably notable for its own article. SwisterTwister   talk  00:27, 14 March 2016 (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.