Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tumbledry

Tumbledry

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 14:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 14:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi

Tumbledry is a leading laudromat chain in India that opened and organized the commercial clothes cleaning market segment in the country. They have over 1200 stores in India and it is a feat in itself, considering that they are profitable and have been essentially bootstrapped. Their franchise model has benefitted many in India and a lot have also achieved profitability.

The information of the content has been sourced from leading mainline publications in India and many articles cover the startup in depth. Please suggest the links that you feel are surface-level. I will do my best to find alternate links. If you feel any other improvements need to be made, please do mention. I will be happy to work on the content again. Supriya.jain2511 (talk) 16:30, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please use your own words, we heavily discourage WP:LLM use in any project discussions. Nathannah • 📮 19:34, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nathannah

These are my own words. Not sure how this is sounding LLM-derived content. I am sorry, but this is how I write. Supriya.jain2511 (talk) 05:19, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Sources for this are plagued by WP:RSNOI problems, for example [1] which is obviously not independent. Profiles and inclusions on lists are generally no good for showing notability; a company has to become socially significant and therefore will receive in-depth, contextualized coverage in multiple WP:RS before a Wikipedia article is appropriate. FalconK (talk) 03:17, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi FalconK

I can research and look for more reference links. I am not sure why Ref 1 is deemed 'obviously not independent', because I don't see a disclaimer or a similar suggestion there. What I am understanding is that profile-based articles should be ignored. Please correct me if I am wrong and also share guidance. Supriya.jain2511 (talk) 05:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- It's more nuanced than that, but it's quite rare for profiles in the business press to be useful in establishing notability because the business press is notorious for doing these profiles in exchange for cash or access, rather than as a result of genuine public interest in the subject. The source, Prime Insights Magazine, does not have a discernable editorial policy; we can't even tell if or how they fact-check; this makes the source unreliable. It does not have an ISSN. No databases seem to index it. The article has no byline. This all makes it seem somehow even less reliable than the sources mentioned as being suspect in WP:RSNOI. The article appears to rely, for all its information, on the subject itself and quotes from people closely associated with it (such as its founders); this makes it a dependent source. It describes the company in glowing superlatives, while doing little to contextualize the company, so it does little to establish notability. FalconK (talk) 06:54, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Hi FalconK
  
  Thank you for the explanation. It was helpful. I also checked the ISSN and found that it doesn't exist. This is a new learning for me.
  
  I have removed this citation. Hope this helps. I am keen on retaining the page because of the credibility and authenticity of the business. I believe that 1200 stores across India is a significant and notable feat. Supriya.jain2511 (talk) 16:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SERIESA, WP:NOTWEBHOST, and WP:RS. The page reads like a franchise agreement, not an encyclopedia article. We are not a web host. The sources are not reliable; trade magazines tend to publish verbatim information that is handed over to them. Again, the more of this type of page is further ammunition for the richest man in the world to persuade his on/off patron to destroy our business model. Bearian (talk) 22:41, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bearian
This page is not a franchise agreement or being developed with ulterior motives. There is base for notability which lies in multiple facts, including:
1. The business has attempted to organize the laundry operations segment in India. No other company has done that before Tumbledry.
2. They have over 1200 franchisees in India.
3. Their business model is unique and has helped entrepreneurs across India through its franchisee model.
4. They have never raised external funding and have already reached breakeven point in revenue terms. A lot of startups end up taking funding for the sake of it. Also, it is unfair to claim that all content published by trade magazines is paid content. This is entirely baseless. I do not treat Wikipedia as a webhost. This is a grave misinterpretation that you are making and I would request you to refrain from making such suggestions. While I am happy to edit the article to ensure that it meets Wikipedia's guidelines, I would request you to share pointed suggestions for improvement.
Supriya.jain2511 (talk) 10:05, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The fundamental issue here is that you are treating the existence of a Wikipedia article about this company as a reward that the company is entitled to for success, whereas a Wikipedia article comes subsequently to significant independent coverage in reliable third-party secondary sources, which generally happens as a result of social significance. Consider the difference between the best possible article that could ever be written about this company, and then contrast that with the articles that are already written about Nortel, Microsoft, or Ford Motor Company. FalconK (talk) 11:32, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]