Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rikkir

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. Joyous! | Talk 00:14, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rikkir (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Puff piece written by apparent founder of company. References do not appear to meet the definition of reliable sources. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:49, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:40, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: A WP:SPA article by User:Rikkir inc. The best of the given references is the bylined Huddle item, although it is a typical start-up piece: discussing how they got started, their hopes for funding, etc. My searches are finding nothing better. At best WP:TOOSOON; fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:GNG. AllyD (talk) 18:33, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as not only a hasty attempt at advertising, it was never fully completed, let alone with the necessary improvements, it shows this is only existing for advertising, so the clear solution for such blatancy is deleting. These matters are not complex at all especially when it's been simplified to begin with. SwisterTwister talk 00:53, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Spam. Huddle.today article is a press release from an unreliable outlet. This source is good, but it's the only thing out there, and its local and brief. Not nearly enough to meet WP:CORP. Grayfell (talk) 03:16, 25 November 2016 (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.