Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FamPay

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. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:19, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FamPay

[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)

non-notable company. All references (and the contents of the article) are either PR or merely about funding,. Neither meets the requirements of WP:NCORP. DGG ( talk ) 17:21, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly believe this company is notable in India. You can google FamPay and you could see they have quite big audience and users. If you ask me why I did not cite much references, it's because I don't want to cite many references in a sinlge sentence or paragraph.

If you google them, you can see over 40+ articles about them on notable magazines and websites. They're featured on newspaper as well. Please do a re-check DGG. THANKS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D3FAULTX8 (talk • contribs) 04:36, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is not the number of references, The references substantial 3rd party reliable published sources, not press releases or blogs or postings or mere notices. Promotional interviews, no matter where published, are not reliable sources; See WP:NCORP . DGG ( talk ) 04:52, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:02, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — Per DGG, the organization doesn’t seem to satisfy WP:ORGCRIT. Celestina007 (talk) 22:38, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: All the references appear to follow the same format, so based on press releases and the like. While this is an innovation for family and teens in India, WP:TOOSOON applies. Lets see them after they are more than an IP raising 4.7 million. I mean if I can quote that, its been on too many web pages and promos. --Whiteguru (talk) 07:49, 11 January 2021 (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.