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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:38, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BetterWorks[edit]

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

Barely-there sourcing. One decent writeup in a WSJ blog, and a bunch of TechCrunch schlock (see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 221#Are news articles written by TechCrunch staff considered RS?). Fails WP:NCORP by a mile. ☆ Bri (talk) 05:27, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 06:03, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 06:03, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 06:03, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Bri - They may be notable, but for the wrong reasons. See Fortune, Bloomberg, a follow-up to the same story by Bloomber, and then this which looks like a second incident of the same. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:22, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Bloomberg referred to it as " a moment of infamy", which seems to indicate NOTNEWS. If the matter does become notable , the first step would be to delete this article and start over in aa proper NPOV manner, not add the necessary negative material to an otherwise promotional article. DGG ( talk ) 01:12, 7 March 2018 (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.