Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skurt (company)

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. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:00, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Skurt (company)

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

No demonstration of notability. Struggling to find any independent in-depth coverage. Fails WP:NCORP. Edwardx (talk) 00:06, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:06, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:21, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:21, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Delete This was founded in 2015. It is a startup, that for Wikipedia fails the concept of WP:SUSTAINED. Unscintillating (talk) 00:36, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Coverage such as this does not establish Notability ground for Wikipedia. It is typical startup with standard press coverage. “Our customers don’t consider us as an alternative to car rental companies; they use us as a replacement for car ownership,” said Josh Mangel, 23, one of Skurt’s founders.Light2021 (talk) 04:30, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the three minutes you invested in this analysis and text preparation, how much time could you have spent comparing with other startups or to define the concept of a "typical" startup? And what defines "standard press coverage" in techcrunch businessinsider and nytimes articles about a startup with product in two cities in California and one in Florida? This passes WP:GNG without looking beyond the article for sources. Unscintillating (talk) 00:03, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the three minutes you invested in this text preparation, how much time could you have spent comparing with other startups or to define the concept of a "typical" startup? Please contribute constructively in AfDs instead of just turning it into a forum. LibStar (talk) 14:54, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see no more understanding of what constitutes a "typical" startup or "standard press coverage" in this post than that shown by Light2021. Just looking at LibStar's claim that I spent "three minutes" on the previous post doesn't match my contribution history, which provides that 44 minutes elapsed, prior to the post LibStar is attempting to mock. My comments are on-topic and relevant to the strength of argument and to the discussion at hand. The closer should discount Light2021's !vote. Unscintillating (talk) 15:49, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non notable. L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 01:37, 14 August 2017 (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.