Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alifbee

Add links
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 draftify‎. With the page only a month old, I find this a reasonable result within closer discretion despite low participation. The nominator has indicated an openness to this option, and it also gives article creator Bookrd one last chance to improve the page. Bookrd is advised to ensure the concerns raised here are fully addressed before restoring the page to mainspace, or else it has an increased risk of outright deletion in a subsequent second AfD. Submitting through WP:AFC for independent review may be a wise path forward. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 15:20, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alifbee

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Current sources are mostly from the product page themselves or listicals or promotional research? I checked https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A3%D9%84%D9%81_%D8%A8%D9%8A and none of the sources there seem to meet our criteria either. Like this paper by an Alifbee employee. I also tried google news in english and Arabic and nothing. Currently written very promotionally as well. Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 04:09, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
Download didn't work Download didn't work Download didn't work ? Unknown
Yes Struggled to translate, but multiple authors this time. I struggled to translate this pdf, but it looks similar (maybe slightly better?) than source 3 ? Unknown
Yes ~ Only one author, can't find any peer review ~ Just a feature list essentially ~ Partial
~ Uses referral codes No Every article seems to be written by one guy WP:SPS No I don't see Alifbee mentioned? ✘ No
Yes No No Just a directory listing ✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
In general, the consistent problem is that it is included in lists of products, but the coverage of the specific product is borderline trivial due to the low amount of relative space spent covering it in each piece. Plus with some of the research it is hard for me to say certainly one way or another if it feels reliable due to either single author, unclear peer review standards, ect. The first source is interesting but I can't download it? The link doesn't work, just takes me to a white page. Overall for me these are better than what was there before but still non-convincing.

If not, would you prefer specific types of sources (e.g., mainstream media coverage, major educational/tech reviews, or higher-tier peer-reviewed journals)?

Yes! All of the above! If you have these you should have lead with them but they're never too late!
The best thing would be articles in news or similar about this company, ideally entirely about said company. You don't frequently see research papers used for corporation notability, that doesn't mean they don't count though. Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 06:49, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
check this link
-https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380303408_Children's_Acquisition_of_Arabic_Language_Based_On_Chomsky's_Theory_Of_Nativism
-this is another paper from Egyptian university it is in arabic
https://jfees.journals.ekb.eg/article_340607_210743b714d83b02f463987e3112041b.pdf
I need your feedback to avoid the deletion Bookrd (talk) 21:32, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do either of these papers even mention Alifbee? Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 00:02, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
yes they mention it , I could extract the texts and translate it to you if you want Bookrd (talk) 11:58, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The researchgate paper is in English? and I searched both 'Alifbee' and 'Alif bee' and there's only one mention of it in the entire document Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 18:17, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bookrd: Please don't use ChatGPT, etc. to communicate here. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 13:26, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 05:08, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I need sometimes to address the problems above , so kindly if we could poet pone the deletion for sometime to finish it Bookrd (talk) 13:07, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ATD-I may be an option in this case however the best thing to do is continue improving the article Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 14:33, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We need more source assessment and outcome opinions from editors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:21, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please address the comments of Liz.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fade258 (talk) 14:12, 6 October 2025 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alifbee&oldid=1316621289"