Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xat (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Lakcs evidence of the depth of sourcing needed Courcelles (talk) 05:19, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Xat
AfDs for this article: Articles for deletion/Xat.com
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Online chat website and app of little to no notability. No evidence of any significant coverage of this app in any reliable media. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:00, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Among the previous-AfDs box, Articles for deletion/Xat.com had consensus delete for the website that is the current article's topic. The other three are for unrelated things called "Xat" or variations, not this current article's topic. DMacks (talk) 15:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The previous AFDs list is autogenerated as part of the Twinkle AFD process. I've overridden the automatic list with the specific list of the one topic related to this one. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:36, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! DMacks (talk) 15:38, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, this website has been mentioned in a book, has thousands of videos on it made by its users, and it's own Spanish wikipedia article. Please reconsider. Thanks. --Tanner708 (talk) 00:40, 24 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment The mention in the book begins "My buddies in England run a website called XAT..." The text goes on to use XAT as an example of one method of using perceived scarcity to build demand. This is not an independent source (the author knows the founders of XAT personally), so it does not constitute an independent source. An even if we allow for the fact that Kawasaki might be using the term "buddies" liberally, the example cited hardly confers notability to the website. The quantity of videos available, and even the presence of an article on another Wikipedia, do no indicate clear notability. (Other Wikipedias have their own processes and guidelines for assessing notability.) WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 01:01, 24 January 2017 (UTC)


 * A couple more here, here, here, here, here, and here. Don't think they'll change anything, however. --Tanner708 (talk) 01:53, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment The Microsoft reference is the most promising of the bunch, but even that amounts to little more than "look at this cool thing someone made with our software." The rest of the citations you've added here are mentions in passing about Xat's image optimizer app, which they don't even appear to host any longer.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 00:28, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:05, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:05, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 21:26, 7 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - There's some mentions but lacks the signficant coverage that would hoist this over the notability bar. -- Whpq (talk) 17:05, 13 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.