Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ekar (carsharing app)

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. Modussiccandi (talk) 08:12, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ekar (carsharing app)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Possible block violation and recreation. the page was drafted recently https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Draft:Ekar BoraVoro (talk) 09:08, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Transportation, Middle East, and United Arab Emirates. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:17, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Very Promo. An article about raising funds and an interview with the founder don't contribute much towards notability. I can't find any other sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 14:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I'd say the amount of coverage from The National, Gulf Business, and Gulf News is sufficient, despite the promotional nature of the article. SWinxy (talk) 20:29, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The resources come from reliable websites which claim the notability of the company and passes WP:GNG. See Euronews-Meet the Entrepreneurs: Vilhelm Hedberg, The National (Abu Dhabi)-Why buy a car when you can save money on renting or sharing instead?, Forbes-MENA's Top 50 Most Funded-Startups, UAE’s ekar launches car subscription service in Saudi Arabia, The National (Abu Dhabi)-Generation start-up: UAE's ekar drives car-share sector at top speed, There's a new pay-per-hour car rental option in Dubai, Khaleej Times-Ekar adds 500,000 cars to its fleet. Rath Butcher (talk) 13:50, 21 May 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE. ✗plicit 14:40, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 10:06, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I haven't taken a super close look at the sources so no comment on whether those are independent, but I've done some c/e and removed some of the promo tone. Hope that helps. Blue Edits (talk) 10:35, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the sources are promotional and superficial. NortonAngo (talk) 15:27, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:58, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lacks indepth coverage fails wP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:47, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - I think that the The National and Gulf News coverage could begin to establish a case for notability, but they do have a veneer of promotionality to them. The Gulf Business coverage is one step worse in this capacity, as it uses a collective byline. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 21:27, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. For the most part I agree with Rosguill's analysis, but the Gulf Business articles read clearly of being press releases to me, Gulf News slightly less so, and both of them would fall under the standard notices/routine coverage parts of CORPDEPTH, so I am comfortable eliminating them entirely. Rest of the ghits seem more of the same. Two marginal articles from the same newsorg then, does not NCORP make. Alpha3031 (t • c) 03:32, 10 June 2023 (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.