Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MyPhone myA1 Plus

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. ^Complex/_Rational 16:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MyPhone myA1 Plus

[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)

Of the given sources, two are from the brand's website and one is a YouTube video. The only other source, [1], appears to be a specs sheet rather than the kind of in-depth covering we'd expect from a reliable source. From a WP:BEFORE, I could only find [2], from a website which is explicitly a self-published blog. All in all, doesn't look like the product meets WP:GNG. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 12:25, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Technology, and Philippines. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 12:25, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. I've looked for reliable sources regarding this product, but I only saw tech blog websites, which are generally unreliable. This product, all in all, is not notable.AstrooKai (Talk) 12:42, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete GSearch just gave me shopping sites and your typical blog / youtube video reviews --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
impossible, i foud this: https://www.myphone.com.ph/product/mya1-plus/ and the specs https://specs.yugatech.com/product/myphone-mya1-plus/

however, the second link isn't a blog. JGBlue1509 (talk) 17:58, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first link is WP:PRIMARY, which doesn't help establish this product's notability.

The second link is still a blog, even if it mainly displays device specs. It has an "Our Rating" section and is operated by a person, which additionally fails WP:UGC. It's already considered unreliable at this point, but the website further strengthens that by saying, "We cannot ensure that all the information provided on this page is entirely accurate." Implying that they aren't confident in the accuracy or reliability of their information.

As the nominator has said, we need in-depth coverage from reliable sources such as newspapers, not just from a simple specs page. AstrooKai (Talk) 18:34, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you check https://www.yugatech.com/team-yugatech/, you can see that they are a team of bloggers, as stated in their mission statement. AstrooKai (Talk) 21:50, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How about this one: https://www.imei.info/phonedatabase/myphone-mya1-lite/

is this a blog or not? JGBlue1509 (talk) 03:00, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would consider that a primary source. The source is also not sufficient to establish the product's notability. AstrooKai (Talk) 13:53, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Iis this the end of afd message? It says:

End of AfD message, feel free to edit beyond this point JGBlue1509 (talk) 03:41, 7 December 2024 (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.