WP:Articles for deletion/Freshdesk

:{{la|Freshdesk}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Freshdesk Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Freshdesk}})

An article on this company has been speedy deleted several times, either as G11 or A7. A somewhat improved version was submitted to AfC; I asked for further improvements and made some myself. It is now considerably better than earlier version. Personally, I do not have any confidence in the independence of most of the references, and the more reliable ones are mere notices. But I know some others think differently about references like this, so I told the submitter I would accept it, but then send it to AfD for a community decision. My own view, is delete and salt. DGG ( talk ) 23:36, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

• Delete and salt, per DGG. Almost certain COI, and actually basically spam. Sources are essentially churnalism, nothing of substance at all. Guy (Help!) 23:54, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
• Delete and Salt as I concur, 4 deletions in the past 3 years is entirely excessive and the fact we know, as it is, these publications and subjects are entirely "paid-for news", we cannot confide at all of them being genuinely independent news, thus there's nothing to actually support here. Also, the fact the blatancy has been consistent each time shows the concerns, and quite likely, we know there will be a 6th if we delete it now, hence the salt. Not to mention, it's obvious both the contributor quite likely has a paid stake in this or is otherwise involved, and the company too is aware and motivating this advertising. SwisterTwister talk 00:16, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
• Delete and salt, per DGG and SwisterTwister. I also think we should delete Girish Mathrubootham as that article's notability is entirely founded upon founding Freshdesk. Kbabej (talk) 00:28, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

::Comment. I've gone ahead and nominated Girish Mathrubootham for deletion. Kbabej (talk) 00:36, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello Everyone, thanks for your feedbacks. Can you guide me on how the resources should be because whenever i write any articles, i take reference of other wikipedia articles . for example i took these as references, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicole_Delien https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zendesk

Also i dont have any connection with these companies directly or indirectly. I generally do take and give importance to the resources that are from the proper sources. I would like you all to suggest a solution for this instead of delete and salt User:Barath Rajendran ( talk ) 11:50, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 16:12, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 16:12, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.