Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gobookmart

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 11:13, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gobookmart

[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)

This isn’t irredeemably promotional is why I didn’t tag with a G11. In actuality this is a very bother line promotional non notable article on a website that is in accordance with WP:NOT#INTERNET. The article describes their goals and treats this like a WP:LINKEDIN, the references are very unreliable also. Celestina007 (talk) 20:27, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 20:27, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 20:27, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 20:27, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 20:27, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 20:27, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:39, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:40, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:40, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete insufficient coverage indicates lack of notability and hence not encyclopaedic in nature. Brayan ocaner (talk) 23:08, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete 1 gnews hit. Fails WP:GNG. LibStar (talk) 00:34, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Promotional and 1 RS. Deathlibrarian (talk) 03:31, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per rationale given at WP:SERIESA. FalconK (talk) 00:49, 29 January 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.