Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Writesonic

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:31, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Writesonic

[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)

It does not meet WP:NCORP. Most sources here are native advertisement (e.g. Deals/Store section, source selling the services themselves), with only a few exceptions, which are passing mentions and not in-depth coverage. MarioGom (talk) 08:49, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MarioGom (talk) 08:49, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. MarioGom (talk) 08:49, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. MarioGom (talk) 08:49, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:14, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not much coverage and agree; reads more like an ad. ContentEditman (talk) 20:16, 16 April 2022 (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.