Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JPods

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 without prejudice against draftification upon request. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:58, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

JPods

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

JPods (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)

Non-notable product concept. No evidence of significant coverage in reliable sources. WP:PROMO/WP:COI concerns as well -- the article's creator appears to be associated with the product, and the page has been deleted twice for notability and spam reasons and then re-created by the same user. Jfire (talk) 17:34, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. Jfire (talk) 17:34, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Owen× ☎ 19:47, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Computing. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:26, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
• Delete Should be salted this time. Raymond3023 (talk) 03:40, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, Previously PROD'd article so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:04, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. No product, no implementation, no article. --Ouro (blah blah) 10:25, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
• Keep - Another day another person trying to reinvent the train. While there is no current implementation, it is mentioned in several news articles including the Boston Globe. The article as it stands now is bad though. I'd be willing to rewrite it if keep is agreed. Also, User:BillJamesMN should be blocked from editing because he's the founder of this and it's a clear conflict of interest. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] --StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 03:43, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

  I support draftify as an ATD if you want to rewrite it! Jfire (talk) 04:28, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

  Comment. Another angle: Is the company notable for anything at all? Actually putting a product on the streets, any kind of product? If not, maybe the founder might be notable? @User:StreetcarEnjoyer: While I see the articles... okay... if there are articles for the concept that can be used, fine, otherwise it's just... well... next of kin to speculation if they haven't actually got anything to show. --Ouro (blah blah) 15:54, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to consider option of draftifying as suggested by the nominator.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:31, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

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.