Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SeeClickFix


 * 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 keep. Daniel (talk) 00:55, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

SeeClickFix

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Lacks WP:CORPDEPTH. Only one eligible source: the NYT. Other sources are local and either based in interviews (mostly quotes) or press releases. czar 07:01, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  czar  07:01, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions.  czar  07:01, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:33, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The book covers SeeClickFix on several pages. The book has a section titled "The Reach of SeeClickFix" on page 140: "As of March 2010, over three thousand people were receiving watch-area alerts from SeeClickFix, and the site was getting over two hundred thousand views a day. Most of the views come via news companies that have embedded the SeeClickFix tool on their local news sites, including Gannett's Tennessean, Hearst's San Francisco Chronicle, and Tribune's Baltimore Sun. Indeed, SeeClickFix has quickly spread beyond New Haven to become a national and even global phenomenon. ... [Paragraph about its use on two hundred local news sites and how its used on mobile devices] The site is also used from Australia to Argentina. [paragraph about other countries that use it and how it is translated into six languages]"  This is a detailed profile of SeeClickFix.  The article notes, "Founded in 2008 in New Haven, Connecticut, SeeClickFix has contracts with more than 160 cities to provide reporting tools and software to mayors' offices, sanitation departments and public works agencies. To date, more than 350,000 users have reported some 800,000 issues."  This is a PhD dissertation. The author notes, "I report on a case study of SeeClickFix, a civic technology company that builds tools enabling citizens to report infrastructure problems to local governments."  The article notes, "SeeClickFix isn’t meant for emergency use — that’s what good, old-fashioned 911 is for — but it can indirectly aid emergency responders. Government Technology magazine reported that in the wake of Hurricane Sandy, the app was used to pinpoint storm damage and assemble volunteer teams, keeping 911 lines open for more pressing emergencies."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow SeeClickFix to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 04:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC) </li></ul> <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:16, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, WP:RS sources found in the FT, NYT, & WSJ. SailingInABathTub (talk) 09:38, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * FT fails WP:CORPDEPTH as a repackaged interview with the founder. WSJ only mentions the company in passing. The NYT one is fine, as I've already mentioned above. czar  01:30, 3 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep I found this article about the potential of SeeClickFix in Government Technology from 2011 as well as numerous local sources about municipalities adopting the service. I believe the sources do meet WP:CORPDEPTH --Enos733 (talk) 17:46, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep it's fluffy, but this is an app/website with fairly wide usage and there are sources supporting notability even though the article is in a poor shape. I made some fixes to it while I was looking through this AfD. Graywalls (talk) 04:16, 8 March 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.