Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/YourStory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Michig (talk) 07:55, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

YourStory (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A blog written by people in huge amount. Not even credible journalism. Heavely funded by notable people. All the references are nothing but " FUNDING - FUNDING - FUNDING -FUNDING. Blatant promotions and advertising of being get funded and nothing else. BBC Article reference? Seriously? I am trying to find out what significant they wrote about this one! Nothing significant but another startup company. Merely being popular or capturing good Alexa rank does not make a website encyclopedia significant. For being in Wikipedia need to be much more significant than this. Else Wikipedia will become a Startup directory. 1000s of startups happens every day. Just another one. Definitely getting funded by VC, and building Wikiepdia page for their publicity. If seen then left only 1 paragraph to say. Just because they belong to elite group of funded startup does not mean they are Encyclopedia notable. Light2021 (talk) 19:39, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:33, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:33, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:02, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete by all means as this is an interesting one because this website itself is actually used by other people who want to start PR articles, and they not only cite it as a source, I imagine they also cite it as an existing article example, therefore this is a PR website whose environment is PR and it welcomes it, none of that is acceptable here, and any supposed "independent news" are of course merely republished company PR. SwisterTwister talk 22:31, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[Revert as per WP:BLOCKEVASION using strikethrough font.  20:46, 13 November 2016 (UTC)]
Merely being popular does not amount to its notability. People or company are using their sources for citations of notability. It is just another blog written by people or promoting companies of any kind. No sign of credible news media by any credible media agencies. Wikipedia even blocked this for using as a references for any people or company. do not meet Wikipedia standards. Light2021 (talk) 15:27, 6 October 2016 (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.