Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pollfish

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. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:19, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pollfish

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

Insufficient evidence of importance: the reference is a mere notice of initial funding. DGG ( talk ) 01:20, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as searches found links at News, browsers and Highbeam but noting better convincing for better notability. SwisterTwister talk 03:27, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 03:27, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 03:27, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 03:27, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:54, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 18:29, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (without prejudice to future recreation) a relatively young company with only a few mentions in not particularly high quality sources (VentureBeat and TechCrunch are not particularly prestigious), and a passing references in a somewhat more respected source (i.e. one Washington Post blogpost mentions using them to run a poll – it is WaPo, but it's only a blog, not an actual article). Maybe with time, better sources will appear – in which case the article can always be recreated. SJK (talk) 09:12, 21 March 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.