Talk:UBreakiFix

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Notability

This article has been deleted twice in the past, in 2009 and 2016. From a quick scan, only the Forbes article looks as though it counts toward notability, with the other sources not passing WP:CORPDEPTH. -Lopifalko (talk) 07:06, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Thanks for your help with citing the sources properly; I'm still learning how to properly format here. I swapped out a few links immediately after reading the titles you updated and realizing they were opinion pieces. I will continue to do so now. They only opened in 2009, so I can certainly see why the 2009 version was deleted! I suspect the company still wasn't large enough in 2016 to be considered established/notable. They have opened hundreds of new locations in the years since, however. Mudkipz613 (talk) 07:27, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mudkipz613: Good. It's not about the number of locations but about whether reliable sources have written articles with significant coverage of them, where that coverage isn't routine business announcements, or listicles. Hence why I thought only the Forbes article cut it. Cheers. -Lopifalko (talk) 12:03, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]