Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Home Service Club


 * 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. Unfortunately, no amount of editing can create notability - only extensive coverage in secondary, reliable sources can do that, and these have not been produced. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:57, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

The Home Service Club

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Company that has only trivial coverage in reliable sources, and the first page of Google being your standard yelp reviews and BBB complaints. PROMO article that fails GNG. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:37, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   17:48, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   17:48, 10 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment I'm sorry, I'm new to Wikipedia, so hopefully I'm doing this correctly. I based this wikipedia article off of one of a similar company called American Home Shield. I was wondering what makes that page more relevant than this one? What would make the Home Service page relevant like the one I based it off of? MattMicJay (talk) 10 April 2017 —Preceding undated comment added 18:19, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't have time to look in-depth at that article now, but a quick Google News search for it seems to turn up a lot more sources (though many of them also appear to be PR, so the article still might not meet our inclusion guidelines). Wikipedia bases its inclusion criteria on notability and discourages promotionalism. This company does not have publications in reliable sources that are normally required for inclusion. Other articles existing is not in itself a reason to keep one article, because there are many more articles created than their are reviewers to check them. Sometimes articles that don't meet our guidelines slip through the cracks for years. The question at this discussion is if the company in question has enough sources to be included at Wikipedia. from my research, it doesn't appear to. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:30, 10 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment Thank you for your help on this. I'll look at the GNG guidlines you mentioned. What type of sources would be considered more reliable? If I could find more reliable sources that show notability I assume the page wouldn't be taken down? Hoping to better learn how to make proper Wikipedia additions through this process. MattMicJay (talk) 10 April 2017 —Preceding undated comment added 18:45, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment I saw that American Home Shield was mentioned in this discussion. I tried to do a quick Google search and I found some sites who compare and contrast the two companies. Here are some links link 1, link 2, and link 3. Since American Home Shield is notable enough to have a wiki and these sites are comparing the two, it makes me think that the Home Service Club is at least as notable as American Home Shield. 15:01, 12 April 2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Illuminateyourself (talk • contribs)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 23:57, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete: The industry awards are not in themselves of encyclopaedic notability; the given references indicate no more than a company going about its business, and I am not finding better than online reviews which are not reliable 3rd party sources. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:GNG. (Regarding the repeated mentions of "American Home Shield" above: each page has to be considered on its own merits and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a worthwhile argument here.) AllyD (talk) 06:42, 19 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Not even WP:GNG pass. --Elton-Rodrigues (talk) 12:28, 21 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment So it's been awhile since I looked at this page and to be honest, I'm not seeing anything particularly helpful for what I could do to make the page better for those who think it should be deleted. I've looked over the WP:GNG and, if I'm reading it correctly, these are the standards by which wikipedia determines notability, significant coverage, reliable, sources, independent sources, presumed notability. None of the comments thus far have explained to me why this Home Service Club specifically breaks these rules. It's been outlined that they have won several awards and honors but some users don't think those are notable enough and I'm not sure I understand why. Would that not qualify the company as having significant coverage and independent sources talking about it as described by the GNG? Also, I'd assume that this would also be considered reliable coverage? As for the issue of presumed notability, I assumed that a company with 21,000 fans on Facebook would have qualified. Now, I understand that it looks like some disagree about the notability of the company but no one has helped me realize what exactly would make the company notable. What is it I should be looking for? As far as I can tell from the GNG, this may not be a big company but it seems notable enough to me. I really don't see anything about the page that goes against the notability guide lines. I'd like to do what's necessary to improve the page's qualify in the eyes of other users, because it was the first one I've ever written, but, aside from mentioning the other sources mentioned in this argument I'm not sure what I'd have to do or look for to specifically satisfy those who are saying the page doesn't qualify. I'd appreciate some constructive feedback as to what I should be looking for because right now because I'm not seeing anything that stands out as a glaring issue. MattMicJay (talk) 23 April 2017 —Preceding undated comment added 17:30, 23 April 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.