Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MauBank WithMe


 * 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. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 16:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

MauBank WithMe

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This product doesn't meet WP:GNG notability standards. There seems to be no reliable, independent, in-depth sources on it. The 2 most promising sources I've found have reliability problems: The first sounds like a press release, and the publisher even makes a disclaimer that they're unreliable for accuracy. And the second is a list of awards given out by Infosys Finacle to their clients (one of which is MauBank). There also doesn't seem to be a point in merging per WP:PRODUCT because not only does the information seem unreliable/unverifiable, but the product already has a section on the company's wikiarticle. Whisperjanes (talk) 00:51, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Whisperjanes (talk) 00:51, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Whisperjanes (talk) 00:51, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Whisperjanes (talk) 00:51, 24 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Speedy Delete This is literally the description of every mobile banking app ever and there's nothing unique here.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 01:37, 24 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Please see WP:Not notable.--Kingroyos (talk) 19:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * After-close comment I have, and this is very much not meeting N as a run-of-the-mill banking app. My bank's app has all this stuff, including OCR for mobile deposit, and the sourcing was almost all PR.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 18:19, 8 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep I have taken note about the lack of reliable sources and have address the issue by adding more reliable references. The sources provided include some of the most popular media outlets in Mauritius which includes Inside News, Le Mauricien, Le Défi Media Group, Investors Mag and ION News. With regards to the article from Le Mauricien, I should highlight that Le Mauricien is a major newspaper in Mauritius and that the disclaimer is not specifically about the article itself, but general disclaimer which are usually available on nearly all websites online. The article contain enough information for other editors to expand upon it (See Stub). Moreover, as per WP:PRODUCT, when providing details of a particular products and services would make the article unwieldy, some editorial judgment is called for. If the products and services are considered notable enough on their own, one option is to break out the discussion of them into a separate article following WP:Summary style. It would not make sense to provide all these specific details about the app on the bank's article. With regards to the last point, please note that the app is unique on its own as it is the first mobile app in Mauritius which allows users to open a bank account using their smartphone, conduct video call with the bank officers and uses OCR technology to capture data directly from documents. In addition, the article cannot be deleted on the basis that it is not unique. The is not a criteria for speedy deletion. -- Kingroyos (talk) 18:32, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the added extra sources. However, from a quick lookover, all of the sources still seem to have problems: (note, all quotes are taken from google translate, since I don't speak French)
 * This is a passing mention based off of app rankings. It does not verify anything, other than that the app exists.
 * The only reference it makes to the product is one sentence, and is a promotional quote from the CEO of MauBank: "Mungar added MauBank made a clear statement of intent with its mobile banking app WithMe, designed to adapt to customers’ changing needs and ensure a seamless banking experience."
 * This website seems broken. I can't get it to load at all.
 * This is only an interview with an employee. It is not independence or reliable as a source (See WP:SOURCE or WP:GNG), since it is someone talking about their own product (which is not just self-serving/promotional, but also the employee is making a claim about something other than himself, which doesn't meet the standards for WP:SELFSOURCE).
 * This seems to be some sort of user-generated profile about the bank. It most likely has no editorial oversight, and it could have just been written by the bank itself.
 * does not mention the product. It talks about strategies of the company and banking software, but since there is nothing that directly states it's talking about the product, I would say claiming it is about the product is WP:ORIGINAL research because it is reaching a conclusion not stated in the source (see WP:SYNTHESIS), which is not allowed.
 * Seems completely promotional. It starts: "MauBank strengthens its online presence with the launch of MauBank WithMe. This mobile application brings its customers a new banking experience. This is the first of a series of technological solutions developed by the bank. The mobile app was launched this week and can already be downloaded from the App Store and Google Play."
 * Another promotional piece. Starts with: "In an effort to create a better experience for its customers, MauBank launched the "MauBankWithMe" mobile application this week. Downloadable from PlayStore and Apple Store, the app will allow MauBank customers, wherever they are, to do banking anytime. Transactions vary: balance check, money transfer, card blocking in the event of loss, among others."
 * Completely irrelevant announcment from the company. All it says is: "MauBank informs its customers that, due to enhancement works on its platforms, two of its services will be temporarily out of service as follows: The MauBank WithMe app, from 9 p.m. Thursday March 7 to 5 a.m. Friday March 8, 2019. The ATMs of Petite Rivière, Pope Hennesy, Wellkin Hospital, La Croisette, Dumas Street, Argonaute, François Mitterrand Flacq and Curepipe from 1 hour to 3 hours, Friday March 8, 2019. MauBank apologizes in advance for any inconvenience and relies on your understanding."
 * And here is the source I mentioned earlier, from Le Maurien. It's still probably the best source out the bunch, and I understand what you mean that news websites sometimes have disclaimers to their accuracy.
 * It still seems like a promotional, run-of-the-mill news announcement. It starts: "MauBank is part of the trend and has launched its mobile application, dubbed "With Me", for a few days now. This allows you to check your daily banking transactions, replenish your account and even block and unblock your smart card if the need arises. But the "little extra" that makes this application "more innovative" is the possibility of opening a bank account with all the security guarantees!"
 * I'd also like to point out that all the promotional sources are problematic because a.) they seem like routine news reporting of announcements about the app, and wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS, and b.) I would question the independence or significance of the articles, because they seem like the result of promotional activity, so it is not enough that these sources just exist (see WP:NRV).
 * The product's claim to uniqueness (said above) also doesn't determine notability, since significant coverage, not facts/claims, are what determine notability. I also would say that claim is a WP:REDFLAG - It's an exceptional/important claim that doesn't seem to be sourced with multiple, high-quality sources. The claim the article makes also isn't verified by the sources, because the claim seems to only be made by employees.
 * In summary: the coverage is not independent or reliable, so it still doesn't pass WP:GNG. Even if the product was notable, per WP:PRODUCT which you mentioned above, "If a company is notable, information on its products and services should generally be included in the article on the company itself, unless the company article is so large that this would make the article unwieldy." Every feature of the app is not necessary, and I would say wanting to include them is not enough of a basis to have it's own article. - Whisperjanes (talk) 20:26, 24 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Dear Friend, I took note of the queries above, please find the clarifications here-under:


 * Please note that I have provided this reference after there has been a request more sources to sustain the notability of the app, this reference has been provided to show that the app is among the most popular free financial apps in Mauritius. In addition, the reference is from Inside News which among the most popular news outlet in Mauritius.


 * This reference has been provided as a reference to sustain the fact that it is the first app in Mauritius to inboard customers through a mobile app. I don't understand why we should pick and choose a particular sentence in the article to try to discredit it. In addition, the reference is from The Japan Times which is considered as an independent reliable reference.


 * Maybe you were unable to open the link because the link was pointing to the mobile version of the website. My apologies for this, needful has been done to change the link. The first article is about the launching of the app and the second one is about the features of the app. Please note that Le Défi Media Group is considered to be an independent reliable reference. Le Défi Media Group is among the most popular news outlet in Mauritius. According to  Alexa Ranking, after google, it is the second most visited website in Mauritius. (See )


 * This reference has been provided as a reference to the fact that the apps has unique features which is first of its kind on the island. Investors Mag is among the most popular Business Magazine in Mauritius. As long as the source is not being use to sustain false information and is from an independent, reliable published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. I don’t see why we should try to discredit the reference just because it is an interview from an employee.


 * As you said it yourself, it seems to be a user-generated profile but has not provided any proof to sustain your arguments. Please be more specific on which Wikipedia criteria this reference is invalid and why.


 * , please refer to page 10 where it is mention that the mobile app uses OCR techniques to capture data from National Identity cards. This reference has been provided to sustain this fact. Again, as long as the source is not being use to sustain false information, I don’t see why we should try to discredit it. Your claim of WP:ORIGINAL research and WP:SYNTHESIS is completely irrelevant here.


 * , this reference has been provided to sustain the fact that the app allows video call with the officers of the bank during office hours. Please be more specific on which Wikipedia criteria is this reference not valid just because it talks about the product. What kind of article are you expecting for an app?


 * This reference has been use to sustain the fact that the app is available on the iOS App Store and Google Play Store. Again, please be more specific on which Wikipedia criteria is this reference not valid just because it talks about the product. What kind of article are you expecting for an app? In addition, please note that ION News is among the most popular news outlets in Mauritius, you can verify same on Alexa Ranking.


 * This announcement was provided to show that the app is notable enough, the public was informed accordingly when it was not available. You can remove it if you want.


 * This reference has been provided to sustain the fact that, it is the first app in Mauritius which allows users to open a bank account with their smartphone. Again, please be more specific on which Wikipedia criteria this reference is not valid and what kind of article were you expecting for a mobile app? In addition, please note that Le Mauricien is among the most popular newspaper on Mauritius island.


 * With regards to WP:NRV, the number of coverage received by the app from the most popular news outlets in Mauritius as shown above means that the subject has received significant attention from independent sources to support a claim of notability. Please don’t be confused, WP:NOTNEWS talks about the content on Wikipedia and not about the references, instead WP:NEWSORG encourage the use of reliable newspaper as reference to sustain facts. As per WP:NEWSORG, News sources often contain both factual content and opinion content. News reporting from well-established news outlets is generally considered to be reliable for statements of fact (though even the most reputable reporting sometimes contains errors). Please be more specific if you think that the references contain any errors. In addition, as per WP:GNG, if a topic has received significant coverage from reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list. For an app which is only available in Mauritius, we should not expect news coverage of the app from big names like The Guardian, BBC World, Le Monde, New York Times, etc, but from major news papers outlets from Mauritius only. The app may not be notable internationally but it is notable and unique in Mauritius and therefore meet the conditions for WP:GNG. Please have a in dept reading of the Wikipedia policies Reliable sources, WP:GNG, WP:NEWSORG and be more specific why and specifically on which criteria the article should be deleted. The reasons you have given are too vague and are not compelling enough to claim deletion based on the criterions of Wikipedia. Cheers.--Kingroyos (talk) 19:45, 2 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete - run of the mill app. Bearian (talk) 15:25, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:Not notable.--Kingroyos (talk) 19:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV. All of the sources are too closely connected to the subject (ie press releases or paid for PR). My WP:BEFORE search yielded nothing to support notability.4meter4 (talk) 00:41, 3 March 2020 (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.