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. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 23:06, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Privee AI (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)

Literally every source is a copy of the exact same press release, which is WP:PRIMARY and doesn't count for notability. Only sources I could find with a quick WP:BEFORE were more press releases, nothing counting for GNG. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:19, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:19, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:25, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:25, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delaware-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:26, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete All available sources are WP:PRIMARY, as stated by the nominator. Therefore, the company is not notable. Silvymaro (talk) 22:16, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: no independent coverage Helpful Raccoon (talk) 23:12, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Per nom. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 01:54, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I use this app and similar competitors have their own page Rand34 (talk) 08:59, 28 January 2025 (UTC) Blocked for sockpuppetry. PhilKnight (talk) 20:06, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: per nom also fails WP:GNG. Anktjha (talk) 14:52, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I'm a fan too of this app and it deserves its own page like others Kellys234 (talk) 15:23, 28 January 2025 (UTC) Blocked for sockpuppetry. PhilKnight (talk) 20:06, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I wish to keep this page too MauriceDesmond32 (talk) 15:28, 28 January 2025 (UTC) Blocked for sockpuppetry. PhilKnight (talk) 20:06, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Was this AfD shared somewhere outside of Wikipedia? It feels hard to believe that three users would all coincidentally find it and !vote there on their first edit. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:49, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It might have been shared in the discord server for this service, see this comment by the article creator. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 00:48, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: An article on a company, moved into mainspace on the connected contributor's 11th edit. While it is interesting to see a spate of new editors, it should be noted that Wikipedia notability for companies requires more than a repeated press release and satisfied users. Searches do not find evidence of attained notability. AllyD (talk) 15:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Fails NCORP. Badbluebus (talk) 21:58, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP: GNG. Note that the sourcing comes primarily from several copies of the same press release, reposted verbatim on several different websites. The Keep votes were likely canvassed and should be disregarded. HyperAccelerated (talk) 22:18, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per the comments here, and the fact that there appears to be canvassing on the "Keep" side.Plasticwonder (talk) 22:42, 31 January 2025 (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.