Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nobroker.com


 * 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. Compelling source analysis Spartaz Humbug! 23:44, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Nobroker.com

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Pure WP:ADMASK, WP:PROMO. Just another startup page without having any encyclopedic value. Qualifies WP:TOOSOON. Hence, calling for an AfD. - Hatchens (talk) 07:02, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Hatchens (talk) 07:02, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Hatchens (talk) 07:02, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 09:50, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 09:50, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 09:50, 22 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak keep The article needs a major cleanup, almost to the point of WP:TNT, but there are a couple of proper RS references and it does sound like a significant enough tech venture to warrant an article, as long as the promo fluff — which currently makes up much/most of the article — is removed. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:56, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: The article needs some clean-up by removing anything promotional. I also found some reliable sources which talk about it, its products and acquisitions:, , , , and . That said, the article is good enough to pass WP:GNG.  ASTIG😎  (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 05:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete The references provided above are interview style where the founder can say pretty much anything and fail WP:ORGIND, WP:SIRS. The others in the list are routine and trivial announcement of partnerships, hiring staff and product launches that fail WP:CORPDEPTH. The other 15 references in the article are in a similar state, even one which is pure advertising, Why you need NoBroker that fails WP:ORGIND as another interview style report with the lines “Tenants have been paying brokerage year on year without seeing .... states the CEO. All in all, it is a generic property site of which there is millions. It entirely generic. It fails WP:NCORP, specifically WP:ORGIND, WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:SIRS as well as WP:DEL4 and WP:DEL14.    scope_creep Talk  12:52, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep: After a major clean-up the article can remain. Some of its content sounds like an advertisement so that definitely needs to be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philosophicalscientist (talk • contribs) 17:13, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Five references have been taken from the site: Lets examine the rest:
 * * This one has smiling image of Akhil Gupta (left) and Amit Agarwal (right), suggesting it a press-release.
 * * All brokers get automatically banned from the site,” shares Amit Kumar Agarwal, Co-founder and CEO, NoBroker, who is an alumnus of premium schools IIT Kanpur and IIM Ahmedabad. Fails WP:ORGIND.
 * * "We see this as a right opportunity to expand our presence in other cities as well," its Chief Executive Amit Agarwal told PTI here. Fails WP:ORGIND.
 * * Forbes. Non-Rs. Deprecated.
 * * Small profile listing the company.
 * * Times of India. "We strongly believe that technology can disrupt this market." Amit Agarwal, founder and CEO of NoBroker, said the reason people trust brokers is for getting documentation such as rent agreement and for assurance on the new tenant. Fails WP:ORGIND.
 * * Super low quality Techcrunch. “We feel that a peer-to-peer chain has to happen,” Agarwal, formerly with PWC and ANZ Bank, told TechCrunch in an interview Fails WP:ORGIND.
 * * [ttps://www.forbesindia.com/article/checkin/nobroker.com-ventures-into-property-resale/41409/1] Forbes. Deprecated.

I will not go into the rest. Rest assured, not a single reference is secondary in nature. All of them are press-releases or interview style article. Fails [{WP:ORGIND]], WP:SIRS, WP:DEL4, WP:DEL14.  scope_creep Talk  17:31, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I never noticed the ones above. Lets look at the first three that should establish notability.
 * Saurabh Garg, co-founder and Chief Business Officer of NoBroker.com, said: “We are happy to scale up our offerings on co-living houses and combine our synergies with OYO LIFE to provide safe, hygienic, affordable, and fully managed accommodation to young professionals. Fails WP:ORGIND.
 * “In the last 15 days, number of enquiries have jumped up considerably. A lot of them are looking to upgrade themselves to a bigger house,” said Amit Kumar Agarwal, co-founder and CEO, Nobroker.com This fails WP:ORGIND.
 * ... painting, repair & maintenance, to preparing the rent agreement, finding new tenants when the previous tenants vacate and organising home visits for prospective tenants, led to the launch of this rental guarantee service six months ago” said Amit Agarwal, co-founder and CEO, NoBroker.com' This fails WP:ORGIND.

All these references show is that the owner can say anything they want, as long as they paying for it. They are all dependent sources, fails WP:SIRS as well. They are junk.  scope_creep Talk  17:36, 2 December 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: One more round but I'm leaving towards delete.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 22:19, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep A News search turns up numerous citations of data provided by this company in articles about Bangalore's housing market. This seems to lend itself to a positive notability argument. The article is well written and uses available supporting sources - I think it may be difficult to find true secondary sources for a real estate venture.--Concertmusic (talk) 14:26, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. Despite the lengthy comments above listing questionable sources, a cursory search finds several good ones: an Entrepreneur.com article (by a staff editor), two separate Economic Times articles (both by staff editors), and an April TechCrunch article (by a staff writer with previous bylines at VentureBeat, CNBC, The Outline, CNET, and Mashable).
 * All of these articles are primarily about the subject. They are not passing mentions, the company is the primary focus of the article.
 * All of these articles are written by uninvolved parties. They are all from staff writers and editors employed by the publications. None of them are "press releases" or contributor blogs. WP:ORGIND criteria for source independence do not consider the presence of a "smiling photo" of a company's founders to be evidence of "vested interest". News articles about a subject typically feature photos of them, and quotes from them; this is not the same thing as "churnalism" and does not indicate a financial conflict of interest.
 * All three of the sites I mentioned are reliable sources -- I've searched WP:RSP and the noticeboard archives. There is no consensus to claim otherwise.
 * Moreover, in respect to scope_creep's two assertions above, Forbes is not a deprecated source; the entry for Forbes at WP:RSP says "Forbes and Forbes.com include articles written by their staff, which are written with editorial oversight, and are generally reliable." The deprecation applies to contributor blogs only, for which the RSP entry says "Check the byline to determine whether an article is written by "Forbes Staff" or a "Contributor". The byline in this case is "Shruti Venkatesh, Forbes India Staff". RSP does not apply.
 * Now, most of the sources listed by scope_creep are indeed shoddy and shouldn't be in the article; and for this reason, they also shouldn't affect our assessment of GNG (it's an Indian company, so there's probably coverage that isn't in English). However, I think the sources I found are sufficient to establish notability on their own. And this isn't exactly a WP:MILL company either: "In September 2020, a mob of angry local brokers attacked the company’s office in Bangalore, to protest being excluded from the company's platform.[13][14]" This seems pretty out of the ordinary, doesn't it? jp×g 03:40, 12 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment Looking at the sources that User:JPxG posted above:
 * The article at is a press-release. More so it fails WP:ORGIND as it is interview style article. ::
 * Looking at this: “We are going ahead with the bonuses and looking to hire people with 4-5 years of experience. We think enough talent is available in the market and in the coming days, we want to increase our market share,” said Akhil Gupta, co-founder and CTO, Nobroker.com.' This also fail WP:ORGIND as an interview style article. More so, it WP:CORPDEPTH as trivial coverage salary increases.
 * The third one: Akhil Gupta, Co-Founder & CTO at Nobroker said, "At NoBroker, we leverage the latest technologies to provide a top notch real-estate experience Fails WP:ORGIND as a well as being completely banal in its approach. Every company uses the latest technology.
 * This one: India’s NoBroker raises an additional $30M from General Atlantic   In a joint interview with TechCrunch, NoBroker’s founders Amit Kumar Agarwal, Akhil Gupta, and Saurabh Garg said the investment is an “endorsement” to the faith General Atlantic, its biggest investor, sees in the startup. The new capital will also give enough runway to NoBroker, they said Not only does it fail WP:CORPDEPTH as routine trivia about monies raised but it is fails WP:ORGIND as an interview style article. All of them fail WP:SIRS and all of them fail WP:NCORP.    scope_creep Talk  10:35, 12 December 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.