Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tappr

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 Speedy deleted (G11) (already done) by Athaenara. (non-admin closure) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 19:52, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tappr

[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)

The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of deep or significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. None of the references in the article meet the criteria and having searched I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria. Topic fails WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 18:04, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. HighKing⁺⁺ 18:04, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. HighKing⁺⁺ 18:04, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Maybe even Speedy. This is blatant promotion: "Through our wide range of services, brands can rapidly start leveraging the benefits of NFC within their products." Of course, this can be fixed. 150.000 euro is a startup with tiny seed money. With such a budget you can buy some code from e.g. India or Ukraine but not employ a lot of employees. According to the article it's two?! Already tougher to fix. No in-depth coverage. Clearly fails WP:NCORP. gidonb (talk) 02:29, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy (and tagged as such); none of the existing revisions are encyclopedically acceptable either; and this is obvious promotion. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 19:04, 31 August 2021 (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.