Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bespoke Post

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. MBisanz ^talk 01:37, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bespoke Post

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a company that is of questionable notability. Initially, a search suggests that there is quite a lot of coverage, but on closer inspection, much of this appears to consist of "advertorial"-type content. The company seems to have generated a lot of this, but it isn't independent. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:18, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:38, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:38, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - In addition to the sources in the article, I also found CBS News [1], TechCrunch [2], Men's Fitness [3] and a namedrop in Fortune [4] that didn't seem like advertising masquerading as articles to me. shoy (reactions) 14:07, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- WP:TOOSOON and no CORPDEPTH. Coverage is trivial: CBS is interview with the founder; TechCrunch is funding news; Men's Fitness is one paragraph in a round-up of similar services. The company exists; it raised money; and is doing PR. Insufficient depth for an encyclopedia article. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:51, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and K.e.coffman . Fails WP:CORP and WP:SIGCOV .It is upcoming a case of WP:TOOSOON at best.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:00, 23 August 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.