Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CleanItSupply

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 Draftify. Star Mississippi 03:27, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CleanItSupply

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An article describing the product proposition of a company supplying cleaning products, sourced to press releases (the fuller version of the award PR quotes reproduced by korea.issa.com is here). Searches find passing mentions, verifying this as a company going about its business, as does the Apruve survey rating, but failing WP:CORPDEPTH; nor does their @CleanItTV YouTube channel appear sufficiently significant to serve as an alternative basis for notability. Fails WP:NCORP. AllyD (talk) 08:34, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Pennsylvania. AllyD (talk) 08:34, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback. I will update the article with other sources shortly. This is what I could find during my initial search. Since the company is well-known and well-established in its field, it should be possible to find more sources to back up the article. Vb123123 (talk) 08:54, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify - I agree with AllyD's reasoning but think that if Vb123123 is willing to work on the article to improve it, draftifying it would be a better way of keeping the article out of mainspace. However, since I was unable to find sources I would also support deletion on NCORP grounds. — Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. 10:58, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm writing about the article that might be taken down because it doesn't have enough sources. Even though I know it's important to make sure that everything on Wikipedia can be checked and is backed up by reliable sources, I think it's too soon to delete this article and may even be counterproductive.

it is important to consider the potential value of the article to Wikipedia readers. If the article's topic is interesting and important to the Wikipedia community as a whole, having a well-written, informative article may be helpful even if it doesn't havem any sources yet. In these situations, it might be better to mark the article with a "citation needed" template or work to improve it by adding more sources than to delete it.

I urge you to carefully consider these points before taking any action to delete the article in question. Thank you for your time and consideration. Vb123123 (talk) 06:29, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for providing time to work on this article. I have removed the content that lacked a credible source and replaced it with content (Newsweek Ranking for Best Online Shops 2021) the source has also been included. I have also updated the page with other useful content (community initiatives and the Nigerian scam incident) that was covered by CBSNEWS and CNN with sources). Once again, I urge you to please consider this submission, as this article maybe informative and helpful to Wikipedia users. Thank You Vb123123 (talk) 14:22, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (or draftify if Vb123123 wants) - Unfortunately, none of the added sources contribute towards WP:GNG or WP:NCORP. The best is the CNN Business article, but it doesn't really go into the kind of detail that WP:NCORP requires. Suriname0 (talk) 22:35, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.