Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Popexpert
: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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=Wikipedia%3AXFDcloser%2FSoft_deletion_refund_preload&preloadparams%5b%5d={{urlencode:Popexpert}}&preloadparams%5b%5d={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Popexpert}}&editintro=Wikipedia%3AXFDcloser%2FSoft_deletion_refund_intro&preloadtitle={{urlencode:Popexpert}}§ion=new&title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_undeletion&create=Request request the article's undeletion]. Liz Read! Talk! 22:27, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
=[[:Popexpert]]=
:{{la|1=Popexpert}} – (
:({{Find sources AFD|title=Popexpert}})
Fails WP:NCORP. I think this business failed. Probably never gained enough traction. 100 subscribers on YouTube, and the most recent video is 6 years ago. The last tweet on Twitter was in 2016. No website as far as I can see. Edwardx (talk) 18:08, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Websites. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 19:50, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Decent sources, but the sources are more about the notable folks involved in launching this startup rather than anything this startup accomplished. — Sean Brunnock (talk) 21:24, 9 April 2022 (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.