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 and salt. Per WP:SNOW I don't see any reason to draw this out and waste more of the communities' time. Randykitty (talk) 10:46, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Has been draftified and returned by a mix of users following a G11 earlier this year so bringing it here for larger discussion. A BEFORE shows only passing coverage and nothing at the CORP-level depth. StarMississippi 03:01, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
without reading the citation , donot put in AFD , Media pages who is not contributing anything is live on wiki . so media which contributes socially has to be identified and brought forward SreenivasKrishnan (talk) 03:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
would like to know why this is tagged for deletion. this is an media platform who contributed huge in covid era by providing free platform for journalist. before putting to AFD please read the links and news.. hope you understand... SreenivasKrishnan (talk) 03:11, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately that is not a case for notability which requires significant, in depth coverage. Do you have any connection with other editors working on this article that you should disclose? You seem to have found this very suddenly. StarMississippi 03:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
would like to know firstly.. before putting this article to AFD , have you read the content or notability.. as how you found the article same way i got out.. we are here to support ..am not having any connection with others.. i felt good by reading links.. so i supported.. SreenivasKrishnan (talk) 03:28, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
important striking factor for me is free platform.. this has to be brought up..to public. we writers has to support ... SreenivasKrishnan (talk) 03:31, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Companies are required to meet WP:CORP, being a free platform has no bearing on that. If you write for it, you need to disclose that. See also WP:PAID, WP:COI. StarMississippi 03:34, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
again please donot change the discussion flow .. i would like to know why as of sudden you suggested this article for deletion. am seeing an social commitment in the article supporting this channel and new ideas put forward by this particular blaze.. so we have to bring it to other peoples , then only other can understand.. by this it will be useful to public.. secondly ..am not writing for corp.. and my intention is pure to bring new ideas to front and support as an writer... see the notability ... SreenivasKrishnan (talk) 03:44, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hey..
article and citation seems socially comitted and new ideas notability media platform.. please read the citations .
one more thing.. would like to know why suddenly tagged for AFD.please explain Annthomasjoy (talk) 03:51, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
i noted that same user is repeat trying to demotivate the writers and page named B4BLaze.. As writers we are not supposed to do that .. we have to support for good things and not aim for any other benefits... Annthomasjoy (talk) 03:53, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It was tagged for AfD because rather than waiting for AfC, you moved it to mainspace when, as I said to your colleague, there is no indication it meets the requirements for a company. Socially committed and new ideas have no bearing on what makes a company notable. @SreenivasKrishnan I am not changing the discussion flow. You do not understand why it wasn't in mainspace. You're allowed to move it -- but that creates a community discussion especially when there have been so many versions of this article. and my intention is pure to bring new ideas to front and support as an writer is definitely not something you should be doing as Wikipedia is not for promotion. Would either of you care to disclose how you found this article? StarMississippi 03:55, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
again .. have u read the citations.. link . please read it ..
second , how can u notify some other persons as my colleague .. did he told you.. he is my colleague and did i mentioned is somebody my colleague.. donot overwrite.. from your view point what makes notability .. ;please explain .. i will reconsider my thoughts after hearing this.. Annthomasjoy (talk) 04:01, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CORP is what defines notability. I read the citations, and I did my own search. I am unable to find anything that meets the criteria. It is not my POV, it is the community's. If you two are unrelated, the results will show that. You two just happened to stumble on this article unconnected? StarMississippi 04:05, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
please read the malayalam news attached also and what am feeling that this article is meeting the notability and this has to be shared to public.. how you happened to stumble on this article , same. i seen the same from you that you are acting as you biased . Annthomasjoy (talk) 04:10, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
how can it be an promotion .. if you are simply pointing out it as pomotion .. then all notable activities doing my an organisation or an person will fall to promotion right .. please donot mix the things.. would like to suggest you please read or undertsand the article values and understand the importance of the things.. if you are writing something .. then if suddenly an user comment it as promotion .. will it be right ... SreenivasKrishnan (talk) 04:04, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Bring new ideas to front" is promotion as defined by Wikipedia. This discussion will go for at least seven days and all editors are able to weigh in and establish consensus on whether there should be an article. I have read the article. Please stop insinuating that I haven't before nominating it. This article has been on my radar for almost a month. You haven't disclosed how you just happened to find it today StarMississippi 04:08, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
same thing as how you radar am also analyzing this . am expecting few others will understand this importance Annthomasjoy (talk) 04:12, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy to explain. It was created in mainspace in November in a way it shouldn't have been (the creator missed a step) and showed on the AfC logs because it had extra templates while in mainspace. I'm an AfC reviewer and the article in the log and moved it to draft space. StarMississippi 04:19, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
yes this now turned to an interesting communication. For me i got few set of articles for correction and out of this one was this .. so i read the citation link and worked on it .. from my understanding no other media platform has provided an free platform to develop for journalist .. after completing the course.. so quite interesting ... Annthomasjoy (talk) 04:24, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
same as you are radar the article same for me .. i was analyzing the fact behind and supporting.. you are manipulating the things in a such a way to delete this article , i mean trusted article to AFD. This is not for promotion.. i hope still you donot know about the importance of promotion and writing the fact.. please donot include all articles in promotion and insult the writers... SreenivasKrishnan (talk) 04:16, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - half for the article itself, half for the discussion above. Thanks @Star for bringing this to AfD. Kazamzam (talk) 13:27, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator comment both SreenivasKrishnan and Annthomasjoy sock blocked. If this closes as delete, recommend SALT since this has a disruptive history. StarMississippi 14:22, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Absolutely falls short of WP:ORGCRIT. Would suggest G11 based on the Sock/Paid/Spam. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
if I'm reading @Spicy's comments correctly at the SPI and @Jimfbleak's January block of IPN23, this may be G5 territory. Not 100% sure though since they're editing in violation of a UPE block vs. a SOCK one. StarMississippi 20:15, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt, considering the history of socking with that title. LilianaUwU(talk / contribs) 02:15, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt, having just denied one of the sock's unblock requests (a rather arrogant one, really); any article that someone felt required this many socks clearly would not have been worth keeping. Daniel Case (talk) 07:40, 14 December 2022 (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.
