Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OtakuKart (2nd nomination)


 * 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__. Policy based arguments are all on one side here, and this is not a vote. Courcelles (talk) 13:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

OtakuKart
AfDs for this article:


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

This article is mostly sourced with press releases/paid branded articles which are primary sources. Lacks coverage in secondary sources. Fails WP:NCORP. US-Verified (talk) 02:58, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Websites, India,  and Gujarat. AllyD (talk) 05:38, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:42, 25 April 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  06:39, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep or Draftify This one is wierd because of the many sources that say "featured content" or "sponsored article", although I think it meets WP:NCORP and has enough sources. I am on the fence about this one though. PalauanReich (talk) 23:38, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify, no objection. But currently this is sourced with spammy references and there is hardly any coverage. US-Verified (talk) 21:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Copying 2pou's reply below:
 * The website seem to be considered a useful resource by others in the spirit of WP:NMEDIA criteria #s 3 and 4. When trying the AfD source-search links, the site is actually cited by a published book and some GScholar citations such as this. Itsalldestiny (talk) 12:16, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Notability (media) is an essay. This is not a policy-based argument. US-Verified (talk) 06:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I commented on the last AFD. The wikipage has enough citations from relevant news sources. It also played important role in the Indian Anime Movement. BW Business World was estbalished in 1981 an AnimationXpress was estblaished in 2005. like wise. Itsalldestiny (talk) 05:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
 * i will delete your page.this time for sure. 2402:3A80:1EB3:4AD5:0:3F:32A7:9901 (talk) 21:14, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * I will gladly report your page again, you dare alstand up against us. I will show you your place 2402:3A80:1CE9:83BB:0:44:AD1A:B901 (talk) 08:54, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Who are you and what is up with you people? Stand up against what? Itsalldestiny (talk) 14:54, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * I would also like to add that there are elements trying to abuse in the replies. Such as 103.177.172.199 ,  2402:3a80:1b86:9e4a:0:4b:1d80:b201 ,  2402:3a80:1ce9:83bb:0:44:ad1a:b901 . Thanks to  RickinBaltimore  and  Riverbend21  for reverting the abusive edits. Itsalldestiny (talk) 08:57, 3 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete. Almost all of the cited articles read like promotions, with pretty celebratory tones that made me doubt their neutrality as journalists. The "Notable Work" section is centered around the founder Shubham Sharma instead of the website, and the name "OtakuKart" was not even mentioned in those sources. Not enough material and sources to justify a stand-alone article. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 16:59, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't really think they can force news media houses to force mention of OtakuKart as it would be promotional article then from what I can see here, Shubham Sharma is the markeing head of OtakuKart, as seen on his linkedin profile. Itsalldestiny (talk) 21:13, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Admittedly I'm not familiar with how Indian journalism operates. But when a paper is writing about an organization for big story instead of for promotion, the article will usually focus on facts and figures, use less subjective voice, and generally won't have disclaimers. The story-telling style of writing here is what really troubles me.
 * As for the notable work, just because Shubham Sharma has done something, doesn't necessarily means the website is involved. For example, you won't really see a deal with Saudi Arabia negotiated under Trump presidency to be mentioned as a "notable work" in the Wikipage for Trump Hotel. The article cited mentioned no involvement from OtakuKart, so it can only be used to prove the notable work of Shubham Sharma, not the notable work of OtakuKart. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 22:20, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't know about this bizarre business with the IP address talking about "you dare alstand up against us", but these sources are not good. Let us examine them: the Deccan Chronicle one carries the disclaimer Disclaimer: No Deccan Chronicle journalist was involved in creating this content. The group also takes no responsibility for this content at the bottom. Yikesaroo. Sponsored post, i.e. an advertisement. The mid-day post is authored by "BrandMedia", whose authored posts on the site are this; it is also tagged as "partnered content", i.e. an advertisement. The outlookindia source is credited to "Outlook Spotlight", whose other articles are here, and feature content like "Vashikaran Specialist Astrologer In India-Famous In Bangalore (Bengaluru), Mumbai, Pune, Ahmedabad, Chennai, Kolkata, Kerala, And Surat" and "Best Astrologer (Tantrik) to Remove Black Magic (kala jadu काला जादू) in India. +919950524526", i.e. advertisements. The animationxpress source is not visibly tagged as an advertisement but clearly reads like one ("Aside from producing high quality products, OtakuKart.com also ensures to offer all of their products at affordable rates so that its consumers will also enjoy savings at the same time"); this doesn't seem editorially independent from the company. Nor does the aninews site (which carries the disclaimer "This story is provided by PNN. ANI will not be responsible in any way for the content of this article"). The Free Press Journal seems like a legitimate news outlet, but also does not credit the article to a reporter, and uses promotional language throuthout. The NewsX page is a press release; the Business World article never mentions OtakuKart. This leaves two sources: India Today and The Week. It does not seem like these add up to an article at this time, although in the future I would not oppose a recreation based on these in addition to potential later coverage. jp×g 04:25, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I would say KEEP.
 * Ever since I have started editing on wikipedia, whoever this is have just tried to jeopardize the work I have done. For example I have updated lots of local pages, this person removing information from there, reverting edit, messing it up. Same goes for the page submission I am doing, they are keep putting DELETE. Weird.
 * Regarding Outlook Spotlight, the time I used this as a citation, it did not have such advertisements. It looks really ad-rich page at the moment. Same goes for BrandMedia from Mid-Day.
 * I do however, would like to say that the OtakuKart has been repeatedly used on Wikipedia for citation in countless Wikipedia Pages. It has also been cited on a published book as well as few other books. Itsalldestiny (talk) 08:55, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you jp×g for this analysis. Bravo! US-Verified (talk) 10:38, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete or Draftify there aren’t too many sources, but I think a bit of time drafting would improve it. Zippybonzo &#124; Talk (he&#124;him) 06:30, 10 May 2023 (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.