Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qaym

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 no consensus‎. Spartaz ^Humbug! 02:39, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Qaym (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

This is a completely non-notable website. There's nothing about it in Google News, etc. It fails to meet Wikipedia's WP:GNG. US-Verified (talk) 18:25, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Websites, and Saudi Arabia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:07, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:13, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, sources cited in the article seem ample to demonstrate notability. Beyond that, while I lack sufficient expertise to locate and evaluate Arabic-language sources, the article's existence on AR is a positive indicator, as is the fact that Qaym review datasets seem to be very widely used for Arabic-language sentiment analysis tasks. Even if the existing sources come up short, I find it implausible that additional sources cannot be found. -- Visviva (talk) 23:39, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - There is a specialized guideline for websites WP:WEB. The thing is, the site arabcrunch.com was doing articles specifically about this website, but it's down - do we know how reliable it was as a source? Denaar (talk) 15:40, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:23, 2 July 2023 (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.