Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Social Airways

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:56, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Social Airways[edit]

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

Fails WP:CORP - no coverage in major press sources etc. Article is currently referenced mainly to blogs, interview with founder, routine funding announcement, etc. Brianhe (talk) 17:25, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Brianhe (talk) 17:28, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Brianhe (talk) 02:56, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Brianhe (talk) 03:12, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - a good reason why we need to avoid having startups on WP. It's abuse of WP:ENN for misuse per WP:NOTPROMO. MSJapan (talk) 02:24, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:31, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:PROMO; strictly puffery. No indications of notability or significance. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:33, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all above - David Gerard (talk) 13:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as sources and information are both in and of themselves PR, advertising what there is to know, and that's a notorious method of interesting clients and investors, that's why PR churnalism exists, to have companies advertise themselves, since that's the base of why such PR happens, and to let the news media save their money by not having to sacrifice costs. SwisterTwister talk 18:19, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because WP:TOOSOON. There is one significant mention of the company in an independent reliable source:

Social Airways: social platform makes your flights more interesting from Euronews

If anyone finds more significant coverage like that, I'd probably change my vote. -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 18:39, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A particular focus of banned sock-farmer Euclidthalis - David Gerard (talk) 12:41, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lack of coverage in RS and pure WP:PROMO. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 10:58, 2 October 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.