Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MySurvey

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 merge to Kantar Group. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:25, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MySurvey

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

The listed sources establish that the company exist; but all are trivial mentions. While the company is certainly associated with several notable companies, notability is not inherited and this company itself does not meet the threshold of notability at this time. - Barek (talk • contribs) - 04:36, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This company is notable enough to stay in wiki page. As "The Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index", the most widely accepted index among the United States media, like USA TODAY- Consumer confidence hits highest level since Jan. 2008, businesspeople, and many consumers, is conducted by this company, reference: Reuters, foxbusiness. - User:Lsrpopwiki (Lsrpopwiki • contribs) - 05:07, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No one is questioning that The Conference Board and their Consumer Confidence Index are notable; but, notability is not inherited - ie: MySurvey must establish its own notability. Even if that were not the case, neither link you list even mention MySurvey, and certainly don't provide verifiability that it is used for the CCI. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 04:17, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The ABCNEWS [1] reference did mention about MySurvey, in the article it mentioned "Sites like MySurvey and iPinion also pay to fill out brand surveys." and it also have the hyperlink to the webpage as well. --- (Lsrpopwiki • contribs) - 07:17, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that would be the trivial mention I pointed out in the nomination. In total, the article contains five references; I'll spell each one out in more detail:

alexa.com site traffic report for the website archive.org ... presumably this is a typo; but even if changed to MySurvey.com, it's only statistical data
bbb.org report for Lightspeed Research which operates MySurvey.com - has a trivial mention of "Lightspeed Research also doing business as mysurvey.com" and a pair of links
abcnews.go.com article on shopping sites has a trivial mention of "Sites like MySurvey and iPinion also pay to fill out brand surveys" and a link
reuters.com article about an Ad Council Campaign - does not mention MySurvey.com by name, instead indirectly references via the trivial mention "The Ad Council tracking study was an online survey, fielded by Lightspeed Research in June 2012 and June 2013"
usatoday.com article about Super Bowl marketing - no mention of MySurvey.com, instead a trivial mention of Lightspeed Research stating "Nearly two-thirds of 18- to 34-year-olds planning to watch the Super Bowl have smartphones and intend to use them while watching the game, says Lightspeed Research"

None of these meet the threshold of notability listed at either WP:ORG nor WP:N (follow those links to see Wikipedia's guideline on establishing notability). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:16, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Lsrpopwiki: - As you submitted this article to AfC multiple times, are the page's primary contributor, have not worked on any other unrelated Wikipedia articles, and your handle's "lsr" corresponds to the site's parent company LightSpeed Research, I have to ask about whether Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline should apply? --— Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:48, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Selective merge to Kantar Group#Lightspeed Research. Can't see this survey has sufficient notability to justify its own page, but it could be mentioned in the page about the parent company and have a redirect to there. Qwfp (talk) 12:30, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This seems an ideal solution to me; similar to how Lightspeed Research already redirects to Kantar Group. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 04:17, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:50, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:50, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think there is enough coverage to establish notability. Some examples: [2] [3] [4] [5] Northern Antarctica (₵) 03:45, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Those links appear to be blogged opinions, not actually articles about MySurvey, so wouldn't appear to meet the threshold of being reliable sources. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 04:17, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or merge per Usr:Gene93k. I'm find with it being merely mentioned else where, but no need for it to have it's own article. SarahStierch (talk) 16:03, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:23, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as lacking in depth coverage in reliable independent sources, as per WP:GNG. Random uncritical blog don't count as reliable. If coverage is found and refs add to the article, feel free to ping my talk page. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:34, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:56, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Merge - As with comments above, it fails the GNG. --— Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:48, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as fails GNG. -→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 22:46, 21 April 2014 (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.