Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loudsauce


 * 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__. ✗ plicit  14:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Loudsauce

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

A defunct platform/company of strictly ephemeral interest. Source 4 on the page is a blog post and source 5 is a medium post, so those are WP:SPS. The other 3 are just announcements. Just two paragraphs on FastCompany.com, Metropolis is not independent, there is a single one sentence passing mention in Courier international. So no sources meet WP:SIRS and additional searches do not find any WP:CORPDEPTH sources. Fails WP:NCORP. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:25, 12 April 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:57, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising and Companies. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:25, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't mind it being deleted. Nowa (talk) 15:04, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  16:35, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment Business Insider is a usable source not currently in the article, although it does heavily rely on the founders. There are also a few sources discussing specific Loudsauce campaigns: a Greek campaign covered in the The Telegraph and NYT, a failed Romney campaign in Politico, a domestic-violence campaign in ABC13 (but consider WP:AUD), and Occupy in The Atlantic, Der Spiegel and HuffPost. Gets a general mention in this Atlantic interview. Crain's Detroit Business has some reasonable coverage but might not meet WP:AUD. Still lean delete – I don't see any slam-dunk sources that convincingly pass NCORP, just a pattern of promising coverage – but I wouldn't lose sleep if this was kept. Comparison of crowdfunding services could be a viable merge target but would require some work, see the talk page. – Teratix ₵ 13:09, 14 April 2024 (UTC) (amended 09:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC))
 * Upon reflection I am moving to outright delete. There is not enough independent coverage of Loudsauce itself, as opposed to specific campaigns using Loudsauce, to justify an article. – Teratix ₵ 13:01, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability.  HighKing++ 13:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Per HighKing and Teratix. Sources exist, yes, but they do not specifically center around loudspace but other stuff that features loudspace. passing mentions do not warrant notability. X (talk) 19:35, 23 April 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.