Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LevelUp

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. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:02, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LevelUp

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

Nonnotable and promotional. The CNN "article" sorry to say, is no better than an press release. Not everything in a usually reliable source is reliable. DGG ( talk ) 04:54, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I see a lot of coverage in reliable sources: [1] from the Chicago Tribune, [2] from The New York Times, [3] from The Boston Globe, [4] from Business Insider, [5] from TechCrunch, [6] from CBS News, [7] from USA Today, and [8] from Boston.com. There are a few dozen more hits on HighBeam, ranging from 2011 through 2015. If necessary, the article can be rewritten. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:00, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:27, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:28, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – WP:CORPDEPTH pass per a review of available sources about the company. Also, the CNN article within the Wikipedia article is not a press release. This is evidenced by the manner in which it is a bylined news article written by a CNN staff writer, and that Google searches for "LevelUp app aims to keep coupon users coming back", the title of the CNN article, only links to the CNN article, and no others. It's important to accurately distinguish between independent news sources and press releases, and it's assumptive and inaccurate to state that a source is essentially a press release by assertion alone. Lastly, the article is not particularly promotional; it provides an overview of the company, but does not extol its greatness, does not have promotional language, and does not encourage readers to do business with it. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:31, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Clearly passes the basic test of WP:N, with in depth coverage from major sources like the NYT etc. Steven Walling • talk 02:46, 15 June 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.