Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toast, Inc.


 * 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 no consensus. There is no agreement on whether the sources present are enough to write a good encyclopedia article. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  11:10, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Toast, Inc.

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

They may possibly be notable, though almost all the references are either from their website or press releases or notices but this is too thoroughly promotional to rewrite. Borderline notability combined with clear promotionalism is y good reason for deletion. Small variations to the notability standard either way do not fundamentally harm the encycopedia, but accepting articles that are part of a promotional campaign causes great damage. Once we become a vehicle for promotion, we're useless as an encyclopedia  DGG ( talk ) 02:56, 16 August 2016 (UTC)  References
 * Keep – Meets WP:CORPDEPTH. Source examples below, which consist of bylined news articles written by staff writers published in independent sources (not republished press releases) and not always about funding announcements. Edited to remove press releases published by the company itself and removed promotional wording and content. Happy to pare down even more if necessary. Originally the page was modeled after Shopkeep and Revel Systems, other point of sale companies. Abarkth99( talk ) 10:15, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The Boston Globe
 * Boston.com
 * VentureFizz
 * TechCrunch
 * eMarketer
 * PYMNTS
 * The Wall Street Journal
 * KEEP - notable according to Wikipedia standards. DGG has once again brought in their own false assumptions in an attempt to rewrite "case law" for company notability.  Any promotional concerns can be easily fixed by stubbing the article with the independent, reliable references left intact.   --  1Wiki8 ........................... (talk) 17:43, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:05, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:05, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:05, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  19:04, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete and I'm not sure why and where the criticism of the nominator's exact and specific analysis comes from, when the exact article itself still only consists of funding and financing activities along with other coverage consisting of that; there has been exact consensus at AfD that this alone cannot be sustained for notability thus, with nothing else, there's can't be anything else better for a substance. SwisterTwister   talk  22:50, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

 References
 * Keep – Meets WP:CORPDEPTH per a review of available sources. Also meets WP:AUD per having received coverage outside of the Boston area, such as in the Telegram & Gazette. Source examples include, but are not limited to the bylined news articles written by staff writers that have been published in independent, reliable sources listed below. These are not press releases, as evidenced in part by utilizing Google searches using the titles of these article, in which links are only present for these articles themselves, as opposed to press releases, which typically have the same article hosted on many various websites. North America1000 06:34, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Boston Globe
 * BostInno (published by BostInno)
 * Boston Globe
 * Telegram & Gazette
 * Delete -- TOOSOON; the company is not yet notable for an encyclopedia article. The coverage presented at this AfD is mostly local and / or PR like, such as WSJ (funding news); or Boston Globe -- interview with the CEO and preview of the app. Telegram & Gazette does not qualify as out of area coverage as it's a Mass. newspaper.
 * In the same vein, eMarketer is PR driven, as it's a citation to Toast-issued report: "Toast, a restaurant point of sale (POS) company, revealed that almost three-quarters of US restaurant industry professionals plan to upgrade their restaurant technology within the year. ..." (i.e, this is a routine mention which does not add to notability).
 * Overall, coverage is rather trivial and insufficient at this time for an encyclopedia entry. K.e.coffman (talk) 19:10, 26 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - I also concur about the analysis about, it's nowhere close to actually becoming convincing substance because it's all entirely trivial and local PR. SwisterTwister   talk  19:21, 26 August 2016 (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.