Talk:Blippar
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Blippar article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was delete. |
Contested deletion
[edit]This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... It is.....but that can be rectified. I can't believe it was AFD'd for being promotional and the focus was not on GNG or WP:Company. COI issues aren't grounds for deleting. It is shameless promotion but the company does have enough coverage to justify a page. --Rayman60 (talk) 14:53, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- Is that actually true though? Tech press basically is vanity press. It's not uncommon for tech editors to publish what basically amounts to a company's PR statement. I think the lines on GNG are heavily blurred when it comes to tech startups. Brian-armstrong (talk) 21:48, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Categories:
- Stub-Class AfC articles
- AfC submissions by date/17 January 2018
- Accepted AfC submissions
- Stub-Class company articles
- Low-importance company articles
- WikiProject Companies articles
- Stub-Class Computing articles
- Low-importance Computing articles
- All Computing articles
- Stub-Class London-related articles
- Low-importance London-related articles