Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adda52

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. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:18, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adda52

Adda52 (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)

As far as references, I am finding that most are coming from blogs, poker websites, or other unreliable sources. The rest are routine announcements or brief mentions. Also related to AfD for Adda52rummy. According to one announcement, it is now owned by Delta Corp Limited which could be a viable redirect. Currently, it fails WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH. CNMall41 (talk) 17:51, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:11, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:11, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:11, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this probably should be bundled with the Adda52rummy AfD before this is voted on. ☆ Bri (talk) 07:12, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Don't Delete - User:CNMall41 has said " I am finding that most are coming from blogs, poker websites, or other unreliable sources.". I would like to clarify that there are 20 references given in the list.
  

A) Ref. 1 to 4, 19 are poker news website(but independent sources, those websites is not run by Adda52)
B) Ref. 5 - Scroll.in, Ref. 6 - vccircle.in, Ref. 8 - Indiatimes, Ref. 9 - Catchnews, Ref. 10 - Indiatimes Ref. 11 - Business standard, Ref. 12 - The Hindu Business line, Ref. 13 - The HansInida, Ref. 17 - Zee news India, Ref. 18 -Siasat, Ref. 20 - livemint news
C) 2 references from primary sources & 1 reference from others (But not just blog).
Now, please clarify me which are blogs & other unreliable sources. In (B), You can see many reliable reputed news sources. If I am wrong, please clarify.
According to Wikipedia guidelines, complete notability criteria is met by this subject. If not, Please explain. Thank you.Uyarafath (talk) 12:36, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You only addressed half of my comment. I also said that the rest are routine announcements and brief mentions. If you feel that these references establish notability, please state which reference is from a reliable source and establishes WP:CORPDEPTH. I went through them all and cannot find one. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:56, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:CNMall41, I really would like to know. Could you please direct me to any of Wikipedia article about a company and the references which broadly talk about those companies. So, I will somehow understand what exactly mean 'core mentioning'. kindly show me few Wiki articles about companies and those references. So, at least I correct myself. It will be great from you. Thank youUyarafath (talk) 04:23, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Showing you other articles is pointless as we are not discussing other articles - which also would lead down the path to WP:OSE. We are discussing this article and you would need to address why you feel it meets notability guidelines - as I have addressed why I feel it does not. The relevant guideline for you to look at is WP:CORPDEPTH which has been pointed out to you already on this and other AfD discussions. If you can show how the references meet WP:CORPDEPTH and the topic meets WP:GNG, I will gladly request the withdraw of my delete nomination.--CNMall41 (talk) 17:46, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete- Fails WP:CORPDEPTH.  FITINDIA  09:56, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Week Keep there's a lot of low-quality press-release coverage (both poker and business [1]). Things like [2] suggest it's probably enough. Power~enwiki (talk) 21:40, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete / merge to Online poker. There is some coverage, but niche and unreliable, a lot of it seems like rewritten press release. This has major issues with WP:CORSPAM. I do think the company could be mention in (to be created) 'online poker in India' section in Online poker, which could discuss the poker market and list major companies around the world. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:54, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOTSPAM and WP:N. Oppose merging of the content because it is largely promotional. Recent changes to WP:ORGIND mean that there is no policy basis for counting all of the low-quality press release coverage as cited above for a reason to weak keep it. They are excluded by our guidelines as counting towards notability. I wouldn't object to a redirect after the article has been deleted, but there is nothing in its history worth maintaining. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:33, 14 September 2017 (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.