Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daxbot

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. Sandstein 14:11, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Daxbot

[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)

Paid article, and it shows it. First warning sign is the cute professional photo. Then looking at the text, the name of the product is used too much: once in each sentence-- an almost invariable promotional device. Going on to the references, 7 out of 10 references are from local sources discussing a local company; they even say that's why they're covering it. Two are from the company itself. The remaining one is a promotional interview in a trade paper, the very sort that is not accepted as independent according to WP:NCORP, and reading it, it's typical of such: the head of the firm says whatever he pleases about the virtues of his project and the future for it. And if we judge by common sense, rather than the GNG, this product is too minor to be worth encyclopedic coverage. DGG ( talk ) 00:21, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable product fails WP:GNG. Clear WP:PROMO piece from a startup looking to expand their communication outreach or simply increase website traffic/online interest. KidAd talk 00:53, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 01:11, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 01:11, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey KidAd, I wrote the article, and I do have a conflict of interest, which I tried to be very open about. The repetitive use of Dax's name wasn't for promotional purposes but to avoid using gender-specific pronouns- although now that you mention it I can see how it would look that way. I used the nicest photo of Dax that I had available, but I could switch it out if I need to. Quite a few of the news articles that cover Dax delivering are local (except for Katu News and Oregon Business, which are Oregon news companies), and that's because Dax is creating noise locally. I asked for a lot of input when I wrote the article in an effort to offset any natural bias, and used the Articles for Creation process, and I've tried really hard to be open and transparent. I'd appreciate any suggestions you have for making the article better, although I'm trying not to add more info directly to the article because of my aforementioned COI. Lizzythetech (talk) 16:41, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lizzythetech it is not the purpose of wikipedia to help you "create noise" for your product, or spread knowledge of it beyond the single state. DGG ( talk ) 19:51, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DGG You're right: it certainly isn't the purpose of Wikipedia to advertise for anyone. Wikipedia exists to collect verified, noteworthy info that already exists, and make it more accessible to people. I meant that most of the news coverage on Dax so far is from around where Dax is doing deliveries because that's where people run into him (for now- Dax isn't just an Oregon robot, and he'll most likely be doing deliveries for companies out of state as well). Dax is one of the first operational delivery robots in existence, and one of the very few robots making deliveries for the general public. That seems noteworthy to me and worth learning about. Whatever the Wikipedia community decides I really do appreciate the help it's given me so far and the work it does for the larger community Lizzythetech (talk) 15:19, 25 September 2020 (UTC).[reply]

now you seem to be using this discusion page to continue your promotional effort. I suggest some other admin do a speedy delete, and perhaps a block. DGG ( talk ) 02:38, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I don't see any uncorrectable WP:NPOV issues here. This is the sort of contribution we want to see from COI editors - COI disclosed, article very short, list of references longer. Local coverage doesn't help meet WP:CORP but the article is about a product, not the company and the sources indicate the product meets WP:GNG. Since the company is discussed and this is apparently the company's only product there's an argument to be made that WP:CORP must be met. ~Kvng (talk) 15:17, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete Fails WP:NPRODUCT. Made by a small private company with 5 people. No indication of being notable. The only reason they are here is to advertise it. All hyper-local coverage in the home town. Fails WP:ORGIND and WP:CORPDEPTH. Fails WP:NOTADVERTISING. scope_creep^Talk 06:38, 4 October 2020 (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.