Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ReadPartner

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 00:41, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ReadPartner

[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!

ReadPartner (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)

• Fails WP:GNG/WP:BEFORE: No evidence of coverage in independent, reliable secondary sources. Available references are limited to promotional materials, company‐issued press releases, user reviews on marketing blogs—not sufficient under WP:RS. CivicInk (talk) 20:16, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Social science, Technology, Computing, Internet, Software, Austria, and United States of America. CivicInk (talk) 20:16, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:50, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 20:25, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I performed my own searches using Google and did not find anything except this, which looks like AI-generated undisclosed paid news crap, and other sources like that (blogs, product listings, articles filled with SEO-optimized affiliate links). There's simply no usable coverage other than the GeekFlare source, which I can't determine if it's usable or not, but even if it is, one source is not enough. OutsideNormality (talk) 21:13, 23 July 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.