Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chingari (app)

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. Mojo Hand (talk) 13:49, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chingari (app)

[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!

Chingari (app) (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)

Majority of the references are press releases or announcements. No significant coverage. Does not appear to be notable under WP:NCORP or WP:GNG. Bakhtar40 (talk) 05:08, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Internet, and Software. Bakhtar40 (talk) 05:08, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:20, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Routine coverage such as brief mentions, routine announcements, and press releases is all I find. Nothing that would meet WP:ORGCRIT.--CNMall41 (talk) 05:23, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - The article appears to be promotional, and the references are mostly press announcements. Sethi752 (talk) 08:37, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete References are not more than simple passing mentions and press releases. Above all they are not independent. Go with Nomination. Rahmatula786 (talk) 11:27, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I agree that there are no sources to create notability for the article. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 11:43, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• It isn't all press releases, but indeed almost all. And the 1 that isn't isn't about this subject specifically. A quick search for sources turns up the same kind of sourcing as that one: being about the TikTok ban and giving a list of things that were created to fill the void, rather than discussing this one specifically. Uncle G (talk) 12:12, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Per nom. Fails to meet WP:NCORP. RangersRus (talk) 22:14, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. References consist of promotional content, trivial mentions, and non-reputable sites. XwycP3 (talk) 01:10, 25 March 2025 (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.