Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pagely


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 23:57, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Pagely

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

promotional article which fails WP:WEBCRIT and WP:GNG. Could only find passing mentions from relatively primary sources —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 16:22, 17 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Nothing there. --Calton | Talk 15:21, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - Routine, mundane PR sources. Exemplo347 (talk) 17:42, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment They are reviewed by PC Magazine, recommended by someone from the Young Entrepreneur Council, and a business acquisition is reported on by "The Next Web". These all seem like reliable sources to me. Jrheller1 (talk) 01:35, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * You can easily get someone to help review your product on PC Magazine. That alone isn't enough to esablish notability —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 07:26, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:01, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:01, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Concur with nom. Insufficient in-depth coverage in independent RS. MB 03:30, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:GNG and WP:WEBCRIT. CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   22:23, 25 February 2017 (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.