Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EssentiallySports

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 keep‎. There is consensus that the topic is notable, and there is no consensus that the promotionalism issues are serious enough to warrant deletion; I would certainly not consider it eligible for G11 speedy deletion. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:20, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

EssentiallySports (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

This article is mainly sourced with brand posts, press releases, so it clearly fails WP:NCORP. Mercenf (talk) 14:19, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Companies, Sports, Websites, and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:43, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Delete Bizcruft soucing. This is about the best I find [1]. Appears paid promo article. Oaktree b (talk) 18:34, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The website appears to have significant reach and influence, with 30 million monthly readers across 150 countries, according to the information provided. This statistic suggests that it has considerable notability within the sports journalism world. Also, the site claim to produce original content such as the 'Quarentennis - Bridging the Broken Strings' podcast, suggesting that it plays a role not only in disseminating but also in creating sports news and analysis. LusikSnusik (talk) 09:11, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per quite significant site's audience. Also, there is a minimum sourcing needed to establish the website's notability (although some of the sources may not be of high quality). The site also received a notable award from the Indian news site Afaqs, for best sports coverage or something similar. [2]. Could be added to the page's credibility. --BoraVoro (talk) 14:00, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:00, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• keep with over 1 billion views this independent sports media also ranks among top sports sites worldwide per Feedspot. It's also listed among the top 30 blogs in the world per https://detailed.com/50. IMO, looks pretty notable and interesting mix of fan-generated community and classic sports broadcasting. 多少 战场 龙 (talk) 13:38, 3 August 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.