Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doubtnut (2nd nomination)

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. asilvering (talk) 03:39, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doubtnut

AfDs for this article:

[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)

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:38, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:38, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't have a strong opinion either way, but I think the Forbes article provides WP:SIGCOV, and probably also Business Standard India but that's behind a paywall. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 13:36, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Haryana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:47, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A single profile in Forbes is not enough to establish notability. The platform is mentioned in scholarly articles only in statistical comparisons with similar platforms. Virtually everything out there about this is routine announcements, besides the one profile. See WP:SERIESA. FalconK (talk) 02:00, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify-most citations already noted seems to be passing mentions, but the company seems to have potential in terms of coverage, but so far in my searches lacks SIGCOV, suggest to draftify as an ATD to improve article.Lorraine Crane (talk) 18:19, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:21, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Forbes has become deprecated. Bearian (talk) 01:06, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bearian: not per WP:FORBES? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 09:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure @Bearian cited the right guideline. I'd instead take a look primarily at WP:SIRS; a mere profile is almost always a dependent source. You can tell a dependent source because it reports information that is quoted from the company or readily available from the company and indicates no outside sourcing or investigation. FalconK (talk) 09:04, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why not both? In my opinion, Forbes is the Newsweek of the financial press, so it's deprecated, in part because much of their "reporting" is dependent upon whatever the business (person) says, without double checking the facts. "I said what I said." Bearian (talk) 12:16, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not saying that Forbes is always wrong - their reporters' own work appears to be accurate - but they rely heavily on self-reporting and interviews. Bearian (talk) 16:06, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Are there any strong objections to Draftifying this article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:38, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment happy to see it draftified, though I am not sure who will improve it there - the article's history is one of blocked users, IPs and a creator that has retired from Wikipedia. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:27, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete has no notoriety or relevance 200.46.55.53 (talk) 22:47, 10 July 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.