Jump to content

Draft talk:Boostlingo Language Solutions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contested deletion

[edit]

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... (your reason here) --Gusj1189 (talk) 20:23, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am contesting the G11 speedy deletion nomination for this article. While I understand the concern about promotional content, the current draft has been significantly rewritten to comply with Wikipedia's standards of neutrality, verifiability, and notability.

Neutral Point of View: The current version of the article avoids promotional language and subjective claims. It presents verifiable facts about Boostlingo’s founding, acquisitions, product features, and presence in relevant industries in a tone consistent with other accepted entries about companies.

Reliable Independent Sources: The article references multiple third-party, independent sources including:

Multilingual Magazine (August 2023 and May 2025 issues)

Forbes (February 2023 article on accessible technologies)

MedCity News (May 2025 coverage of medical interpretation providers) These sources discuss Boostlingo in a broader context, such as accessibility, language technology, and healthcare communication—not just as a vendor profile. This helps establish notability per WP:ORG and WP:CORP guidelines.

Notability and Industry Relevance: Boostlingo has been recognized in published rankings and articles covering language technology products and healthcare access. Its inclusion in industry analyses and accessibility initiatives (e.g., with Ford dealerships) indicates its significance within the field of language access technology.

Good Faith Effort to Improve: This version of the article was created with the intent to align with Wikipedia's policies. The draft avoids marketing-style phrasing, limits technical jargon, and organizes content in a standard encyclopedic format.

If any specific sentences or sections still appear to be inconsistent with Wikipedia's tone or policies, I welcome collaborative editing to further improve the article. However, I believe the draft contains enough neutral, sourced, and notable material to merit further review rather than immediate deletion under G11.