Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wanderful Media


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 00:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Wanderful Media

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article primarily serves to promote the organization and its product. The notability is questionable because most of the citations are from companies named in the article as "partners" or "backers", the rest are press releases. Nfwin (talk) 18:00, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:49, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:50, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak keep : I did a little cleanup on the page to align it with Wikipedia's editing guidelines. I think the company's going to keep polluting it for its PR/SEO purposes, but beyond just that, the startup is admissible, just like a lot of others that exist on Wikipedia... --Rubyface (talk) 12:35, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Question. Why is Wanderful admissible? Cheers, &mdash;Unforgettableid (talk) 06:23, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:CORP. Aside from a couple of stories at TechCrunch, all I could find was press releases. --MelanieN (talk) 03:04, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 17:58, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 19:43, 22 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete for now. Like the nominator said: "Article primarily serves to promote the organization and its product." Plus, I skimmed both TechCrunch articles. Both look like they might well be press-release churnalism instead of true journalism. I'm not convinced that the article meets WP:GNG. (Dear non-Wikipedians: Please see the GNG summary.) If someone finds better sources in the future, they can present the sources to the closing admin and request undeletion. &mdash;Unforgettableid (talk) 04:59, 23 July 2013 (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.