Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Companies

WP:DS/CO

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Companies. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Companies|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Companies.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from 2015) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Companies deletion[edit]

Gabriel & Co.[edit]

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Not satisfied with the reliability of sources. I could not find anything else online either. GMH Melbourne (talk) 02:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, Lebanon, United States of America, and New York. GMH Melbourne (talk) 02:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Huupe[edit]

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

I can't find mention of this sporting item, beyond sites to purchase it. Appears PROMO. Sourcing used in the article appears in non-RS. Oaktree b (talk) 22:49, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Basketball, Technology, California, Massachusetts, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:07, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aliqtisadi[edit]

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

Fails WP:Notability and Wikipedia:Notability (web) the site is not notable and serves mainly as a promotional platform. It lacks coverage from reliable, independent sources. Additionally, it is listed on the Arabic Wikipedia blacklist, indicating its unsuitability as a reliable source. فيصل (talk) 21:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. فيصل (talk) 21:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Companies, Egypt, Lebanon, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United Arab Emirates, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:09, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ILOT Bet Nigeria[edit]

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

Not notable bookmaker, fails NCORP BoraVoro (talk) 11:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games, Companies, and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:41, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Literally nothing to establish notability here. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:04, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Baba Ijebu[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Not notable betting company; no reliable sources to meet NCORP BoraVoro (talk) 11:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games, Companies, and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cake in a Cup[edit]

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

Delete Fails to meet WP:GNG. The owners names or the company name doesn’t appear in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Cupcake_Wars_episodes Wikilover3509 (talk) 12:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete even if they did appear on that show, notability is not WP:INHERITED BrigadierG (talk) 12:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Can't see how this meets notability. Also one of the citations is to a cupcake-themed 2048 clone?^[1] That's not part of my rationale or anything, it's just amusing. It does bring their citation count down to 3 though, all of which are Toledo-specific news articles. The Savage Norwegian 21:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Television, Companies, and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:37, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have fixed spacing in the headers that broke some of the links, but have no opinion or further comment at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:21, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mackay Radio[edit]

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

Delete Fails to meet WP:GNG. The link http://www.mackayhistory.com/ doesn’t exist anymore. Wikilover3509 (talk) 12:45, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Original editor was blocked with a mile-long talk page of warnings; this seems to be an article about stations in Mackay, Queensland, but this article seems to have been both pay-to-play from a sockmaster who never visited Australia, and completely unintelligible (it previously also had a duplicative entry about Clarence Mackay). No redirect. Nate • (chatter) 17:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I'm not entirely sure whether this article, such as it is, is about an American company or about Australian radio stations… and I'm not sure the article knows either. This has been tagged as a potential WP:CORP failure since July 2021 (only a month after creation); if there is any solution to this that doesn't involve deletion, I'm not seeing it. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Companies, Australia, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have fixed spacing in the headers that broke some of the links (it took me a while to catch that, despite my earlier comment here). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Without even going into suspect bona fides of the page’s author, and putting best spin on page’s intent, which is to serve as a list of Mackay Radio stations, then still fails WP:STANDALONE. Spinifex&Sand (talk) 23:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No Limit Forever Records[edit]

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

Vanity label that no longer operates. Most of the refences are from their own defunct website or to streaming media. No indication of notability. Karst (talk) 15:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:N doesn't expire and it passes based on a few sources, though the Soundcloud sources need to be trashed. Nate • (chatter) 20:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to No Limit Records. First, this isn't a notable company. This is a non-notable company associated with some notable performers. The company itself must be "the subject of significant coverage ... with a stronger emphasis on quality of the sources to prevent gaming of the rules". I don't see any such cited. I see articles about performers, with the company figuring only incidentally or not at all in them.

Second, the company (CA 201030110082) doesn't appear to be independent at all of Master P or No Limit Records. Its only official act was incorporation (Oct 2010). It was effectively dead 3 1/2 years later when its agent quit and officially dead 6 months after that. Except in company blog posts it's Master P who's signing artists, not the putative company founder Lil Romeo, and he's signing them to NL Records, not NL Forever. Some of the signings postdate the 2014 demise of this company. I'm persuaded that No Limit Records, New No Limit, No Limit Forever, and No Limit Global are simply alternative branding of one entity. Yappy2bhere (talk) 01:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cribl[edit]

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

Doesn't seem like it actually meets NORG. Coverage is all your typical SERIESA stuff. History is also a little suspicious TBH but that's mostly secondary to the routineness of coverage. Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, and California. Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Makersite[edit]

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

Hits the WP:SERIESA formula pretty exactly - of the 12 citations on this article, 6 are funding announcements, 1 is a short uncritical profile of the CEO, 1 is a venturebeat article with a comment from the CEO on something unrelated to the company, 1 is a marketing release for a company, and the other 3 just acknowledge that the company launched an Autodesk CAD plugin while talking about something else.

No coverage which goes deeper than stating that a particular business deal took place. BrigadierG (talk) 12:17, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Owen× ☎ 13:14, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Environment, Internet, Software, and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Polly[edit]

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

Contested G11. This appears to have been written by a UPE and reads like an advertisement. All of the coverage I can find is run of the mill. Even if notable, G11 is appropriate. voorts (talk/contributions) 11:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, Australia, and United States of America. voorts (talk/contributions) 11:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Various blogs or reports of a store opening are all I can see for coverage. The Forbes source used is a contributor, so non-reliable. I don't find any coverage we can use for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 12:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Reads like ad. The best I could find is Fashionunited: https://fashionunited.uk/news/fashion/princess-polly-partners-with-true-fit-for-size-and-fit-recommendations/2024031174529 which talks about the brand's partnership with AI platform True Fit, which fails GNG. Forbes here is just a contributor work by Mark Faithfull which has minimal editorial oversight, and is generally unreliable as it was not written by the Forbes Staff, See: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#Forbes.com contributors about Forbes' contributor work.- Tumbuka Arch (talk) 12:59, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's the only way to be sure. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per voorts. Irredeemable. JSFarman (talk) 15:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm sure the brand will meet N eventually, but certainly not with convoluted ad copy like '(the) brand is recognized as the sixth favorite shopping website for upper-income teens in the United States, according to the Piper Sandler Taking Stock With Teens 2023 survey'...that's some stretching that'll break an ankle. Nate • (chatter) 20:30, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I reviewed and accepted this draft in AfC as I felt that the company itself met WP:NCORP and was able to find suitable coverage online. Not going to vote formally as I already had a chance to review the article but several voters are claiming there's not enough sources that can be used to establish notability when I found multiple: Business Insider Sydney Morning Herald Australian Financial Review ~Liance^talk 23:58, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of those, I think only the BI story provides significant coverage. The SMH story is a run-of-the-mill announcement about the parent company's IPO, with a brief mention about this brand, and the AFR story is a one sentence announcement. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Big Ben Phonogram[edit]

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

Delete Fails to meet WP:GNG. The About section in the website listed in References - https://www.bigben.se/phonogram/about draws a blank. Wikilover3509 (talk) 10:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, Sweden, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have fixed spacing in the headers that broke some of the links, but have no opinion or further comment at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WeLab[edit]

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

Fails WPNCORP, GNG. Poor and not-independent sources BoraVoro (talk) 06:49, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Cohan, Peter S. (2018). Startup Cities: Why Only a Few Cities Dominate the Global Startup Scene and What the Rest Should Do About It. New York: Apress. p. 64. ISBN 978-1-4842-3392-4. Retrieved 2024-05-27 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "Two Hong Kong gazelles are the Uber-for-delivery-vans-service GogoVan and WeLab, which operates a personal lending platform. ... whereas WeLab's ascent appears to have been smoother sailing."
  The book notes: "WeLab's story is less dramatic but another great example of a gazelle becoming a unicorn. Cofounder and CEO Simon Loong started WeLab in 2013 after over 15 years in the banking sector. ... In 2013, he founded WeLab, a mobile lending platform that uses risk-testing technology to conduct credit assessments in seconds and enables customers to borrow money with a few taps of their smartphones. Now valued at more than $1 billion, it was Hong Kong's first tech unicorn and its WeLend leading online lending platform has sourced more than “$154 million in loan applications and 16,000 members.” By January 2016, WeLab had loaned money to 2.5 million customers, the majority in mainland China. That month WeLab raised a $160 million Series B from Khazanah Nasional Berhad, Malaysia's strategic investment fund, with participation from ING Bank and Guangdong Technology Financial Group, which is run by the Chinese government, leading to total funding of $182 million."
2. Leung, Grace L K (2019). Innovative and Creative Industries in Hong Kong: A Global City in China and Asia. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-138-06849-0. Retrieved 2024-05-27 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "WeLab: founded in 2013, WeLab is reinventing traditional financial services by creating seamless mobile lending experiences. WeLab effectively analyzes unstructured mobile big data within seconds to make credit decisions for individual borrowers. WeLab operates Wolaidai, one of China's leading mobile lending platforms, and WeLend, Hong Kong's leading online lending platform. The company also partners with traditional financial institutions, which utilize WeLab's technology to offer Fintech-enabled solutions to their customers. WeLab did 6 rounds of funding exercises and raised a total of US$425 million. Her investors include CK Hutchison's TOM Group, Malaysian sovereign wealth fund Khazanah Nasional Berhad, ING Bank, Sequoia Capital and Chinese provincial government fund: Guangdong Technology Financial Group. In 2016, WeLab was ranked in a KPMG-sponsored report as one of the top 100 Fintech companies in the world – sixth in China and 33rd globally."
3. Fannin, Rebecca A. (2019). Tech Titans of China: How China’s Tech Sector Is Challenging the World by Innovating Faster, Working Harder & Going Global. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing. ISBN 978-1-52937-451-3. Retrieved 2024-05-27 – via Google Books.
  The book has a section titled "AI at Work in Fintech: WebLab". The book notes: "An example of AI disrupting traditional banking comes from Hong Kong-based fintech startup WeLab, which provides small consumer loans in an online instant, with fewer than average defaults by relying on AI and data to determine creditworthiness. WeLab technology combs through online data such as bill payment records and social media profiles to figure out which potential borrowers are likely to pay their loans on time. Then it prices and tailors online consumer loans. Consumers complete the entire lending process over their smartphone and don't need an established credit history—an issue among young people starting in their careers. Loan decisions for individual borrowers are made online within seconds. One hint: don't fill out the online form in all capital letters. WeLab has found applicants who write in upper case are not good credit risks. A technology team of more than 210 engineers and data scientists have ..."
4. Mohan, Devie (2020). The Financial Services Guide to Fintech: Driving Banking Innovation Through Effective Partnerships. London: Kogan Page. p. 102. ISBN 978-1-78966-106-4. Retrieved 2024-05-27 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "WeLab is a Hong Kong start-up that was founded in 2013, and which became the first peer-to-peer lending platform in the country. WeLab enables users to borrow money as personal loans from other indi- viduals while delivering lower interest rates than traditional banks. WeLab makes this process as easy as possible, with an online application form and relatively short assessment process being the only barriers to accessing credit. One of the fascinating initiatives implemented by WeLab is Wolaidai, a mobile peer-to-peer lending platform for top-tier university students in China. With the founder of WeLab, Simon Loong, having experience in the commercial banking industry at Citibank and Standard Chartered, this fintech solution draws on experts in the traditional financial system, while taking on some of its biggest proponents. We will undoubtedly see more of this in the years to come."
5. Rubini, Agustín (2019). Fintech in a Flash: Financial Technology Made Easy. Boston: De Gruyter. p. 136. ISBN 978-1-5474-1716-2. Retrieved 2024-05-27 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "Founded in 2013, WeLab is a Hong Kong-based internet finance company that uses exclusive risk management technology to analyze Big Data and offer reliable credit services to individual borrowers in the Asian market. WeLab operates two leading online lending platforms, Wolaidai in China and WeLend in Hong Kong, seeking to offer its customers a seamless mobile lending experience. Furthermore, the company has partnerships with traditional financial institutions, which use WeLab's sophisticated credit risk management tools to use Big Data analytics and offer their customers advanced fintech solutions. In January, WeLab raised $160 million in Series B funding from domestic and international investors, including Khazanah Nasional Berhad wealth fund, ING Bank, and state-owned Guangdong Technology Financial Group (GTFG). This was the first time that funds were raised by a Chinese fintech firm and one of the first times that an international financial institution (ING) financed a leading Chinese fintech player."
6. Less significant coverage:
  1. Lo, John Y. (2016). Angel Financing in Asia Pacific: A Guidebook for Investors and Entrepreneurs. Bingley, West Yorkshire: Emerald Group Publishing. p. 27. ISBN 978-1-78635-128-9. Retrieved 2024-05-27 – via Google Books.
    The book notes: "There appears to be a consensus that the startup scene in Hong Kong has taken a quantum jump in the last five years. A major breakthrough in January 2016 is probably the announcement of the receipt of US$160 million investment in a Series B financing by WeLab. This is a local fintech startup that specializes in peer-to-peer lending technology and operates both in Hong Kong and mainland China. While not publicly disclosed, the valuation of the company has been estimated to be near US$1 billion, qualifying it as the first unicorn24 from Hong Kong."
  2. Gough, Neil (2014-06-16). "Start-Up WeLab Raises $14 Million From Sequoia Capital and Hong Kong Tycoon". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2023-09-19. Retrieved 2024-05-27.
    The article notes: "WeLab Holdings, an Internet finance start-up in Hong Kong, said on Monday that it had raised $14 million from Li Ka-shing, Asia's richest man, and Sequoia Capital, a stalwart of Silicon Valley."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow WeLab to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 08:09, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On top of the sources found by @Cunard I'd add:

Financial Times article profiling the company. This is an earned media feature article, not an interview.
Forbes with a short market report (which I suspect was leaked by Loong)
Forbes again with a feature on the company. This one is a nice profile but clearly based on an interview with Loong.

Keep This is a major fintech player in Asia Pacific, and although WeLend has its own article this is the parent that also includes Mainland platform Wolaidai as well as a bank in Indonesia I think. There are other bits and pieces out there, at the paragraph scale similar to those found by Cunard, but I think the FT piece along with the Forbes 2022 piece should be enough. Oblivy (talk) 10:23, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Hong Kong. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:15, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Air Dravida[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Wikilover3509 (talk · contribs) attempted to start a second nomination for this article, but wound up adding it on to the the first nomination. Their rationale follows:

Fails to meet WP:GNG. Even the website of the promoter Zircon International which is included as an external link draws a blank.

This article did survive that prior AfD from 2010 (and a contested PROD before that), but both of the "keeps" from then warned that the article needed to be significantly improved to avoid renomination. It has since been tagged as a potential WP:CORP failure—which might be the more relevant guideline here—since 2019. All that being said, my involvement is mainly procedural and I have no real opinion or further comment at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:11, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Travel and tourism, Aviation, and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:11, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This talks about the airlines in general at the time it was to launch [1], but that seems to be the extent of coverage. Delete for a lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 22:37, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: it was just a project which died before the launch. Charlie (talk) 04:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IPrice Group[edit]

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

Fails WPNCORP, lacks independent reliable sources; general notability is also not indicated. BoraVoro (talk) 06:56, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Malaysia. Shellwood (talk) 09:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: according to the reason provided by the nom. Charlie (talk) 04:46, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Capital Match[edit]

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

Fails WPNCORP, sourcing mainly from techinasia and similar paid publications. BoraVoro (talk) 06:50, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Singapore. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 07:19, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The first reference is from The Straits Times, the newspaper of record in Singapore, and the rest seem fine to me, whether or not they have a paywall. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 07:29, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have access to it and have read it. All the references to the subject are neither independent nor deep enough. Here is the typical coverage from The Straits Times, a source you mentioned: Mr Pawel Kuznicki, 29, director of P2P platform Capital Match, says: "It's more accurate to say that crowdlending is leveraging on technology to service smaller clients which banks may not be able to. BoraVoro (talk) 14:02, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Being a "newspaper of record" might be helpful in determining whether a source is reliable, but does nothing to determine whether the content contains in-depth Independent Content and meets NCORP criteria. The "rest" seeming "fine" also doesn't have any bearing on GNG/NCORP criteria - which ones in particular (page/paragraph) contains content that meets the criteria? HighKing⁺⁺ 17:15, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 17:15, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SeeVolution[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails the notability guideline for companies. Sources are trivial (routine funding announcements), non-independent or unreliable. Originally PRODed, but missed this previous AfD which unanimously favoured deletion. – Teratix ₵ 03:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, Websites, and California. – Teratix ₵ 03:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WestNet Wireless[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Non notable promotional article Is la🏳️‍⚧ 23:39, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Internet, and Canada. Is la🏳️‍⚧ 23:39, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Studio Yotta[edit]

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

Not notable, looks like a company portfolio. IgelRM (talk) 15:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Oregon. IgelRM (talk) 15:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Video games, Companies, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:46, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Udutu[edit]

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

Reads promo-y currently and I'm not turning up any RS coverage. Some mentions in books that list software, and it looks like its won some minor awards. ~Bluecrystal004^{(talk · contribs)} 03:28, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Internet, and Software. ~Bluecrystal004^{(talk · contribs)} 03:28, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WebGain[edit]

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

No sources found that make this topic meet for notability. 日期20220626 (talk) 04:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Internet, Software, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:51, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peterson Electro-Musical Products[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NORG Once you take out the primary sources (source 1 and 2), you are left with 3 sources used for brief statements. source 3 is a product review thus not SIGCOV, 4 is a product listing thus not RS, source 5 is an ad in a magazine, thus fails RS. A search for sources turned up a mix of product sites, database entries, Social Media and other Primary sources. Prod objected to on the basis that: " longstanding, well-developed article deserves additional review" Lavalizard101 (talk) 22:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Illinois. Lavalizard101 (talk) 22:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It seems that the article is poorly written and sourced, rather than it failing the "general notability guideline". I ran a quick search and found three sources quite early on, that seem reliable, that discuss the company or founder: https://www.thediapason.com/news/peterson-electro-musical-products-celebrates-75-years https://www.premierguitar.com/peterson-electro-musical-products-inc-mourns-the-passing-of-founder https://www.guitarworld.com/news/peterson-electro-musical-products-inc-mourns-passing-founder I suspect that if if you were to search for the products listed in each of the latter paragraphs, you would find them reviewed and discussed in the appropriate trade magazine. Warren L.T. Peace (talk) 22:14, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I quickly ran another search on a few product names to see if I was right, and I appear to be.

https://charlestonclassicalguitar.org/blog/2023/09/24/peterson-stroboclip-hd-review-precision-tuning-at-your-fingertips/

https://guitarinteractivemagazine.com/review/peterson-stroboplus-hd/

https://www.guitarworld.com/news/peterson-stroboplus-hdc

https://www.musicradar.com/news/peterson-stroboplus-hdc-guitar-tuner

https://www.premierguitar.com/gear/quick-hit-peterson-strobostomp-hd-review

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/peterson-stroboplus-hd

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/peterson-vs1

https://mixdownmag.com.au/reviews/hardware-and-accesories/reviewed-peterson-stroboplus-hd/ (no byline)

Warren L.T. Peace (talk) 22:24, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review of your source list:

source 1: a brief routine press release about the company reaching 75 years, does not contribute to notability
source 2 and 3: the same press release published by two different publisher, about the passing of the founder does not contribute to notability
If I remember correctly product reviews that focus on one product are not WP:SIGCOV of the company, thus do not contribute to notability of the company.

SO in essence no SIGCOV that is required to pass GNG. Lavalizard101 (talk) 12:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews that narrowly focus on a particular product or function without broader context (e.g. review of a particular meal without description of the restaurant as a whole) do not count as significant sources from WP:PRODUCTREV. Lavalizard101 (talk) 12:34, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh it does seem that those first three are press releases. Sorry. However, if if product reviews are not permitted, you should start nominating most articles about records for deletion as reviews are all that sustain them. The same goes for record labels. I suggest that you go back and try to do searches, as I suggested. There is a lot written about their products and the company. Their products are used widely in the music industry and the (and the company) have been written about. Warren L.T. Peace (talk) 21:31, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As for WP:PRODUCTREV there are three caveats: the reviews must be 1) significant, 2) independent and 3) reliable, which the sources I provided are (except the one without a byline). And for what it is worth, I did not try hard to find sources. Warren L.T. Peace (talk) 21:37, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again Reviews that narrowly focus on a particular product ... do not count as significant sources So no the product reviews are not significant. What PRODUCTREV means by the caveats is that if the product review gives a broader review e.g. such as reviewing the product as part of a company review and that this company review section must be significant. Lavalizard101 (talk) 09:39, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

if product reviews are not permitted, you should start nominating most articles about records for deletion as reviews are all that sustain them err no need. WP:PRODUCTREV is a subset of WP:NORG, records have a different guideline WP:NSONG which allows critical reviews. Different topics have different notability guidelines. Lavalizard101 (talk) 09:44, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then a move may be in order. Either way, we'll see what other have to write about the subject. Warren L.T. Peace (talk) 00:47, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not one of the facts attributed to non-independent sources 1 and 2 in the article are found in those sources. It is quite possible that the web site has changed considerably since 2011, but this means that very little of the article can be verified and that the content attributed to those sources must be removed. The resulting article will be very thin indeed. Yes, there are product "descriptions" as noted above, and a few that are more than just recitations of product details, but I don't think that product listings or reviews alone rise to NCORP. We would need some substantial sources about the company itself. I did find some mentions in books: mention1, mention2, but just mentions. The most ample source of information is the obit in Premier Guitar, but that isn't enough to achieve NCORP. Lamona (talk) 01:14, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Education Facilitators[edit]

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

Potentially ambiguous title. Doesn't appear to meet WP:ORG / WP:GNG. Unreferenced for 14 years. Boleyn (talk) 16:04, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Education, and South Africa. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:53, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KESU-LP (Hanamaulu, Hawaii)[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. Redirect unnecessary due to parenthetical disambiguation. Not mentioned at list of television stations in Hawaii, either. AusLondonder (talk) 16:30, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Companies, and Hawaii. AusLondonder (talk) 16:30, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: At least in theory its status as one of the earliest channel 6 radio stations in the United States might have garnered it some coverage, but until/unless something more substantial surfaces this is a remnant of the far looser standards of 2007 and has no place in the Wikipedia of 2024. As the nominator points out, the disambiguator means there is no alternative to deletion beyond finding a way to meet GNG. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Qupital[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Can't find anything meeting NCORP, most of the results were the usual ORGTRIV funding announcements. Oddly enough Forbes (Contributor) article was in the regular tab and not News, guess Google is filtering them out now? Results for 橋彼道 (or 桥彼道, they didn't seem to care much) were pretty much the same, Sogou might have been slightly better than Baidu for this one but nothing of note there either. There's an article in Cifnews (雨果网) but it's a paid placement (properly marked, won't bother going into their reliability). I judge WP:NONENG to be very unlikely also. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and China. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. I did not find significant coverage in reliable sources about the subject in my searches for sources that were not about funding or partnernship announcements (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) or an interview with the founders that does not provide significant coverage of the company. Qupital (traditional Chinese: 橋彼道; simplified Chinese: 桥彼道) does not meet Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria. Cunard (talk) 05:09, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Divide Pictures[edit]

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

Exists but doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG / WP:ORG. Boleyn (talk) 12:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Companies, and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:24, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hunan Coal Group[edit]

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

I did WP:BEFORE and searched for independent reliable sources to establish the notability of the subject as per WP:GNG and WP:NCORP, but I found nothing that can establish notability. Here is a breakdown of cited sources:

1: http://www.hnmyjt.com/Item/2.aspx (This is the official website of the Company and is WP:PRIMARY, so it can't establish notability, The full article is just rely on this source)
2: https://www.hunan.gov.cn/hnszf/hnyw/zwdt/201212/t20121210_4719900.html (A government site, can't really establish notability, Just listed hundreds of companies in China)
3: https://clb.org.hk/en/content/hunan-coalminers-strike-over-privatization-plans (Just Passing mention to Hunan Coal Group and the article is only about the "Strike" of the workers of the company, not about the company.
4: https://caijing.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202107/20/WS60f66c85a3101e7ce975a86d.html (The article is talking about the history of coal in Hunan, no coverage of the Hunan Coal Group at all. Also, At the end, the article mentions:"(Author Liao Jianxiang is Secretary and Chairman of the Party Committee of Hunan Coal Group Co., Ltd.")
5: https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2018-05/22/content_5292722.htm (Government site, Even I skip that part, the article does not give in-depth coverage of the subject, it talk about the Jailed of Chairman of Hunan Coal Industry) GrabUp - Talk 12:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and China. GrabUp - Talk 12:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been reviewed and rated Stub-class, which means it is a promising starting article, though large space remains for improvement.

Hunan Coal Group is a large coal mine company of more than 30,000 employees, the largest in Hunan Province of China. This fact alone may make it worthwhile for an introduction in wiki.

As for the reliability of the sources, I will discuss later. Ctxz2323 (talk) 00:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ctxz2323: As you said, “Hunan Coal Group is a large coal mining company with more than 30,000 employees, the largest in Hunan Province of China. This fact alone may make it worthwhile for an introduction in Wiki.” From which Wikipedia rule did you get this information? Go and read WP:NCORP. It requires multiple in-depth coverages from reliable, independent sources to establish notability. It doesn’t really matter how big the company is; if the company is significant, it should obviously get coverage from reliable sources. Also, an article getting reviewed does not guarantee that it will be there forever. GrabUp - Talk 03:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Xie, Chunyang 谢春阳 (2008-02-29). "湘煤集团损失巨大急需援手" [Hunan Coal Group has suffered huge losses and is in urgent need of help]. China Coal News [zh] (in Chinese).
  The article notes: "在今年年初我国南方部分地区遭受的罕见冰雪灾害中，湖南省煤业集团(以下简称湘煤集团)遭受巨大损失，在恢复和重建过程中急需有关部门伸出援手。今年1月中旬以来的冰雪灾害持续时间长，破坏性大，历史罕见．给湘煤集团造成了巨大损失，此次灾害申，湘煤集团的51对矿井停电15天至25天，其中停电5昼夜以上的矿井21对，停电15昼夜以上的矿井11对，停电25昼夜以上只能采用柴油机发电保井的矿井5对。"
  From Google Translate: "In the rare ice and snow disaster that hit parts of southern my country at the beginning of this year, Hunan Coal Group (hereinafter referred to as Hunan Coal Group) suffered huge losses and urgently needed help from relevant departments in the recovery and reconstruction process. The ice and snow disaster since mid-January this year lasted for a long time, was extremely destructive, and is rare in history. The disaster caused huge losses to Xiang Coal Group. According to the disaster, 51 pairs of mines of Xiang Coal Group were without power for 15 days to 25 days, including 21 pairs of mines with power outages for more than 5 days and nights, 11 pairs of mines with power outages for more than 15 days and nights, and 25 pairs of mines with power outages for 25 days and nights. The above 5 pairs of mines can only use diesel engines to generate electricity to protect the mines."
2. Xin, Wen 欣文 (2008-02-27). "湘煤集团受灾矿井抓紧排水" [Hunan Coal Group's disaster-stricken mines pay close attention to drainage]. China Coal News [zh] (in Chinese).
  The article notes: "本报讯1月中旬以来拘冰冻灾害，导致湖南电网严重受损，造成大面积停电，致使湘煤集团51对生产矿井中，有44对矿井不同程度遭受了淹井、淹水平的重创。．目前，湘煤集团正抓紧受灾五_L井排水工作，力争早日恢复生产。据统计，此次冰灾中，因矿井停产、设备损毁、旁屋倒塌和各项救灾投入给湘煤集团造成的损失已超过5亿元，有十多万职工家属正常生活受到严重影响。"
  From Google Translate: "This newspaper reported that the freezing disaster since mid-January has caused serious damage to Hunan's power grid and caused widespread power outages. As a result, 44 of the 51 pairs of production mines of the Hunan Coal Group have suffered varying degrees of flooding. At present, Hunan Coal Group is stepping up the drainage work of the disaster-stricken 5_L well and striving to resume production as soon as possible. According to statistics, during this ice disaster, the losses caused to Hunan Coal Group by mine shutdowns, equipment damage, side building collapses, and various disaster relief investments exceeded 500 million yuan, and the normal lives of more than 100,000 employees' family members were severely affected."
3. Yue, Guanwen 岳冠文 (2006-06-20). "湘煤集团成立" [Hunan Coal Group was established]. Changsha Evening News (in Chinese). p. A6.
  The article notes: "湖南煤业集团(简称湘煤集团)是以涟邵矿业集团、白沙煤电集团、资兴矿业集团、长沙矿业集团、湘潭矿业集团和省辰溪煤矿6家国有骨干煤炭企业重组而成的大型企业。其中前三家进入2005年全国煤炭工业100强企业行列。"
  From Google Translate: "Hunan Coal Group (referred to as Xiang Coal Group) is a large-scale enterprise reorganised from six state-owned backbone coal enterprises: Lianshao Mining Group, Baisha Coal and Electricity Group, Zixing Mining Group, Changsha Mining Group, Xiangtan Mining Group and the provincial Chenxi Coal Mine. Among them, the first three entered the ranks of the top 100 enterprises in the national coal industry in 2005."
4. Ruan, Xiaoqin 阮晓琴 (2006-06-20). "湘煤集团昨日正式挂牌，计划进军内蒙古与山西开矿" [Hunan Coal Group was officially listed yesterday and plans to enter Inner Mongolia and Shanxi to open mines]. Shanghai Securities Journal (in Chinese).
  The article notes: "湘煤集团由湖南省6家国有骨干煤炭企业重组而成：涟邵矿业集团、白沙煤电集团、资兴矿业集团、长沙矿业集团、湘潭矿业有限责任公司和湖南辰溪煤矿。其中前三家进入2005年全国煤炭工业100强企业行列。这6家企业集中主要省属煤炭资源，资产组成十分优良。据悉，组建后的湘煤集团拥有生产矿井50对，总资产为40亿元，3年后煤炭产量将达到1000万吨。... 该集团的组建，正式吹响了湖南省新一轮煤炭资源整合升级行动的号角。"
  From Google Translate: "Hunan Coal Group was reorganised from six state-owned key coal enterprises in Hunan Province: Lianshao Mining Group, Baisha Coal and Electricity Group, Zixing Mining Group, Changsha Mining Group, Xiangtan Mining Co., Ltd. and Hunan Chenxi Coal Mine. Among them, the first three entered the ranks of the top 100 enterprises in the national coal industry in 2005. These six companies concentrate mainly on provincial coal resources and have very good asset composition. It is reported that after establishment, the Xiang Coal Group has 50 pairs of production mines with total assets of 4 billion yuan. Coal output will reach 10 million tons in three years. ... The establishment of the group officially sounded the clarion call for a new round of coal resource integration and upgrading actions in Hunan Province."
5. Tang, Zhenwei 唐振伟 (2013-07-01). ""煤电互保"政府间博弈升级 "三西"煤深受其害. 湘煤集团并未从中受益" [The inter-governmental game on "mutual guarantee of coal and electricity" escalates, and coal in the Three West Regions is deeply affected by it. Hunan Coal Group did not benefit from this]. Securities Daily (in Chinese). p. C2.
  The article notes: "公开资料显示，在今年4月22日召开电煤运行形势座谈会上，湖南经信委副主任杨晓晋在会上要求火电企业要优先采购湘煤集团、资江煤业集团等省内生产的电煤"
  From Google Translate: "Public information shows that at a symposium on thermal coal operation situation held on April 22 this year, Yang Xiaojin, deputy director of Hunan Economic and Information Technology Commission, asked thermal power companies to give priority to purchasing electricity produced in the province such as Hunan Coal Group and Zijiang Coal Industry Group."
  The article notes: "5月，12家火电企业从省内煤矿企业购进电煤量有所提高，但从湘煤集团购进的煤量仍在逐步下降。上述数据显示，湖南省内最大的煤炭企业湘煤集团并未从“煤电互保”中受益。对此，有分析人士认为，湖南的“煤电互保”政策保护了事实上中小煤企，不利于淘汰落后产能。"
  From Google Translate: "In May, the amount of thermal coal purchased by 12 thermal power companies from coal mining companies in the province increased, but the amount of coal purchased from Xiang Coal Group was still gradually declining. The above data shows that Hunan Coal Group, the largest coal company in Hunan Province, has not benefited from the "coal and electricity mutual guarantee". In this regard, some analysts believe that Hunan's "coal and electricity mutual guarantee" policy actually protects small and medium-sized coal companies and is not conducive to the elimination of backward production capacity."
6. Li, Tieqiao 黎铁桥 (2009-03-25). "湘煤集团新疆勘探到百亿吨煤田将成为湖南新的能源供应基地" [Hunan Coal Group. Xinjiang has discovered 10 billion tons of coal fields and will become a new energy supply base in Hunan]. Changsha Evening News (in Chinese). p. A4.
  The article notes: "据介绍,湘煤集团于2008年底与新疆有关方面签署协议，获得在吐鲁番、哈密等地200亿吨煤炭资源开采权，并成立湘煤集团新疆能源有限公司。近日，湘煤集团在吐鲁番沙尔湖煤田钻井探煤,发现厚达151.14米的煤层。"
  From Google Translate: "According to reports, the Hunan Coal Group signed an agreement with relevant parties in Xinjiang at the end of 2008, obtaining the right to mine 20 billion tons of coal resources in Turpan, Hami and other places, and established the Hunan Coal Group Xinjiang Energy Co., Ltd. Recently, Hunan Coal Group was drilling for coal in the Shaerhu Coalfield in Turpan and discovered a 151.14-meter-thick coal seam."
7. "湘煤集团挖掘产能增产确保电煤供应" [Hunan Coal Group explores production capacity and increases production to ensure thermal coal supply]. 中经网 [China Economic Net] (in Chinese). 2008-07-21.
  The article notes: "作为我省基础能源供应主力的湘煤集团，克服年初冰灾带来的重大影响，在部分骨干矿井停产达30天的情况下，上半年仍供应电煤131.4万吨，比去年同期增加10.5万吨。冰灾期间，湘煤集团51对矿井中，有44对不同程度受损。"
  From Google Translate: "As the main provider of basic energy in our province, Xiang Coal Group overcame the major impact of the ice disaster at the beginning of the year. Even though some backbone mines were suspended for 30 days, it still supplied 1.314 million tons of thermal coal in the first half of the year, an increase of 105,000 tons over the same period last year. Ton. During the ice disaster, 44 of the 51 pairs of mines of the Xiang Coal Group were damaged to varying degrees."
8. Li, Junjie 李俊杰 (2016-02-15). Yan, Lu 閆璐; Du, Yanfei 杜燕飛 (eds.). "湘煤集團總經理李義成涉嫌違紀被查曾遭網友舉報" [Li Yicheng, general manager of Hunan Coal Group, was investigated for suspected disciplinary violations and was reported by netizens]. People's Daily (in Chinese). China News Service. Archived from the original on 2024-05-26. Retrieved 2024-05-26.
  The article notes: "湖南省煤業集團有限公司是經湖南省人民政府批准設立的大型省屬國有獨資企業，是全國煤炭50強企業，是該省政府確定的全省能源保障主平台和重點支持加快發展的企業。據悉，該公司於2006年6月19日挂牌成立，現旗下擁有全資、控股子公司37家，擁有煤礦總數60個，總設計生產能力3000萬噸/年。"
  From Google Translate: "Hunan Coal Industry Group Co., Ltd. is a large-scale provincial state-owned enterprise established with the approval of the Hunan Provincial People's Government. It is one of the top 50 coal enterprises in the country. It is the main platform for energy security in the province and an enterprise determined by the provincial government to focus on accelerating development. It is reported that the company was established on June 19, 2006. It now has 37 wholly-owned and holding subsidiaries, a total of 60 coal mines, and a total designed production capacity of 30 million tons per year."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Hunan Coal Group, or Xiangmei Group (simplified Chinese: 湘煤集团; traditional Chinese: 湘煤集團; pinyin: Xiāngméi Jítuán), full name Hunan Provincial Coal Industry Group (湖南省煤业集团有限公司), to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 09:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cunard: But where are the links for me to verify them? How can I confirm that these sources are reliable? Additionally, the majority of them are only a paragraph or two . How can this be considered in-depth coverage of the subject? These are trival mentions, Read WP:SIGCOV to know what In-depth coverage means. GrabUp - Talk 09:59, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are offline sources. The quotes I provided are not the full articles. For most of the articles, there is more coverage of the company that I did not quote. The quotes I provided are sufficient to demonstrate the company meets Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Significant coverage, which says: "The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability. Deep or significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization."

Cunard (talk) 10:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cunard: Offline articles is a very good excuse to my question, that how can I or someone verify them? Also, you can add whatever you want and justify them to establish notability. There is no proof that these coverages are from reliable independent secondary sources. GrabUp - Talk 10:25, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With the responses "a very good excuse" and "you can add whatever you want", there is nothing substantive I can or want to say in response. Cunard (talk) 10:32, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the sources found by Cunard. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 03:47, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mx. Granger: May I know where you confirmed that these coverage are real and are from reliable secondary sources? GrabUp - Talk 04:14, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also feel that, as a reviewer, GrabUp should be more neutral and objective. At the beginning of this page, you said:

"I did WP:BEFORE and searched for independent reliable sources to establish the notability of the subject as per WP:GNG and WP:NCORP, but I found nothing that can establish notability. Here is a breakdown of cited sources: ..."

Let me put some words on your comments.
- 1: http://www.hnmyjt.com/Item/2.aspx (This is the official website of the Company and is WP:PRIMARY, so it can't establish notability, The full article is just rely on this source)
ctxz2323: But getting some data and facts, instead of self-flattering words, from there may be ok.
- 2: https://www.hunan.gov.cn/hnszf/hnyw/zwdt/201212/t20121210_4719900.html (A government site, can't really establish notability, Just listed hundreds of companies in China)
ctxz2323: Again, the citation was for a historical fact, i.e., to support the sentence "In 2009, Hunan Coal Group, China Telecom, and Datang Telecom Group jointly established Hunan Black Gold Times (湖南黑金时代).". And that is a provincial government webite, a very high one.
- 3: https://clb.org.hk/en/content/hunan-coalminers-strike-over-privatization-plans (Just Passing mention to Hunan Coal Group and the article is only about the "Strike" of the workers of the company, not about the company.
ctxz2323: Contributed by another editor, but I don't think it is useless.
- 4: https://caijing.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202107/20/WS60f66c85a3101e7ce975a86d.html (The article is talking about the history of coal in Hunan, no coverage of the Hunan Coal Group at all. Also, At the end, the article mentions:"(Author Liao Jianxiang is Secretary and Chairman of the Party Committee of Hunan Coal Group Co., Ltd.")
ctxz2323: The history of coal in Hunan is relevant to the Hunan Coal Group, as shown by its title "湘煤集团：汲取红色动能建设百年湘煤" (Google translate: "Xiang Coal Group: absorb red kinetic energy and build a century-old Hunan Coal Group".). And the source China Daily is maybe the largest English newspaper in China.
- 5: https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2018-05/22/content_5292722.htm (Government site, Even I skip that part, the article does not give in-depth coverage of the subject, it talk about the Jailed of Chairman of Hunan Coal Industry) GrabUp - Talk 12:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ctxz2323: From Xinhua News Agency? Its news is widely used even internationally.
On the whole, I agree that the wiki article is far from perfect, but not so bad as should be deleted. Ctxz2323 (talk) 08:21, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ctxz2323: Your breakdown does not provide any logic to pass WP:SIGCOV or WP:GNG. Passing mentions from government sites (primary sources) can’t establish notability. GrabUp - Talk 08:42, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These sources are just trival mentions as per WP:ORGTRIV. GrabUp - Talk 08:57, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The ping didn't work, just so you know. I am assuming good faith that the quotes Cunard provided are real, not fake. The sources generally look like reliable WP:NEWSORGs. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So, no proof or links; your vote is based on assumption. Thanks for your reply, but this does not convince me that these sources are reliable secondary sources. GrabUp - Talk 14:31, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reminding (though sounds a bit too tough).

I have just added 2 English sources accessible on the Net. Ctxz2323 (talk) 23:32, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ctxz2323: The first source is from Bloomberg, not a news coverage. Just a small page with intro of the company, not an in-depth coverage at all. The second source is from Wood Mac, an Analytic company, the article does not provide in-depth coverage just a summary and because it is an analytics, is fails under WP:ORGTRIV which says “standard notices, brief announcements, and routine coverage, such as:

of quarterly or annual financial results and earning forecasts,” GrabUp - Talk 03:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Kokotajlo (AI researcher)[edit]

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

Almost all sources show that Kokotajlo is notable only because of his controversial resignment from OpenAI. There are no profiles of him or his research, and I can't find any info that he won any major award or led a major team, etc. Wikipedia is not a news site, and I think that the policy says exactly this: Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Subjects_notable_only_for_one_event and Wikipedia:What BLP1E is not. Artem.G (talk) 08:15, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Companies, and Computing. Artem.G (talk) 08:15, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:BLP1E. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:52, 25 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

On2Cook[edit]

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

Does not appear to meet WP:NCORP. Funding announcements are ORGTRIV, interviews fail ORGIND. Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Companies, Technology, and India. Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Gujarat-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:53, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This company was a contestant on Shark Tank India and this is what most sources cover on the page and this does not make an organization notable merely because a notable event was associated with it. A corporation is not notable merely because it owns or generates notable subsidiaries. The organization needs to be discussed in reliable independent sources to be considered notable. Fails WP:NCORP and fails WP:ORGCRIT. RangersRus (talk) 13:49, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

M. Firon & Co.[edit]

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

I see no reason this is notable. It just seems to be a law firm with no significant coverage. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 02:43, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Companies, and Israel. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:10, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Internationally operating, 8th-largest law firm of Israel with plenty of coverage in 74 (!) years of existence. Easy pass of NORG. Unclear how this could have nevertheless been nominated. gidonb (talk) 03:37, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chirp (formerly Cilter Technologies)[edit]

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

Very new/small start-up business that fails WP:NORG and WP:SIGCOV. The coverage of this small company (of perhaps 12 employees?) is the type of "startup receives seed funding" business reporting that is common for any similar business. What limited coverage does exist relates to the company's previous brand name - to the extent that the only source (connecting the title of the article with the entity discussed in the article) is the org's own LinkedIn page. If we do not have sufficient reliable/independent sources to even establish that a company of this name exists (and is the same company covered in the other few sources), then SIGCOV is not met. Clearly WP:TOOSOON. (Would have PRODed, but the creator of the article moved it to the main article namespace [over DRAFT]. And re-added [at best] quasi-promotional text about the org being "award-winning". Therefore not "uncontroversial".) Guliolopez (talk) 20:53, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 20:58, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 20:58, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a mission statement, not an article. Nate • (chatter) 22:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:17, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. And they can tell whoever runs these things I'm not impressed by the gaming of autoconfirm here. Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Faye Travel Insurance[edit]

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

Company that fails WP:NCORP. On this page, sources 1, 5, and 7 are WP:ORGTRIV coverage of capital raises. Source 2 is coverage of a Faye founder and does not reference the subject. Sources 3 and 10 are commercial, commission-driven review sites paired with Faye's advertising (editorially not under the Wall Street Journal newsroom, caveat lector!). Source 6 is a WP:INTERVIEW. Source 8 provides passing mention of the subject, not significant coverage, and Source 9 appears to be sponsor content/paid placement since there is a clear VentureBeat editorial disclaimer at the bottom. Additional sources found in WP:BEFORE search are sponsor content, trivial coverage, or other reviews on commission-driven websites. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:29, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Travel and tourism, and Israel. Owen× ☎ 15:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is a startup. Startups are usually not notable. Exceptions exist yet not for Faye. gidonb (talk) 13:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gecko Gear[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:CORP. One of plenty of tech accessory companies around the world; what makes this stand out as a more notable one than the rest? B3251 (talk) 21:37, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. B3251 (talk) 21:37, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and Computing. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:04, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:04, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Nothing has changed since last AfD. The current sources are enough to establish notability. Aaron Liu (talk) 12:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course things have changed since then. ORGCRIT has been tightend a lot since 2011 (I understand most people place the change around 2018) and while "puff piece" probably shouldn't (and wouldn't) have been a ringing endorsement even back then, the article in The Australian fails current standards for ORGIND by such a distance I struggle to imagine anyone who has actually read the article would think it complies with the current guidelines. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how it fails ORGIND. Sure, it's a business column, but what else? Are you claiming that the writer invests in Gecko Gear?
We already have three sources that pass NCORP. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:17, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how it fails ORGIND... do you mean besides the fact it's almost entirely composed of quotes and paraphrases taken directly from what the company has to say? ORGIND has two parts. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:08, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Probably spent way too much time on this, but whatever. Not sure what the third source that passed NCORP was. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:42, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Created with templates {{ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{ORGCRIT assess}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Secondary?
"Macworld Australia Staff" (20 October 2010). "Australian iPod, iPad and iPhone accessory maker Gecko Gear announces attendance at CES 2011". Macworld Australia. Archived from the original on 2018-04-17.	This is a press release. Two ways to tell. Well, three if we count the fact that it's obviously a press release from the content.	– Not really applicable	–
Barker, Garry (8 June 2011). "What's the best case scenario?". Brisbane Times. Also found in The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age (PQ 870699777 TWL link, can't find a FUTON copy)		–	Look, it literally has 5 sentence-sized paragraphs related to the subject, none of which are not a quote, none of which are actually about the subject, plus one about a bag they make.
Foo, Fran (14 August 2010). "Gecko Gear makes the case for quality iPhone accessories". The Australian. Archived from the original on 2010-11-24.	Pretty much entirely quotes. Probably should be analysed under TRADES tbh.	–	– At least it's actually vaguely about the subject?
Barker, Gary (29 January 2007). "Lifestyle accessories turn the world into iPod's oyster". The Age.	–	–	Besides being a WP:CORPROUTINE announcement, what can we verify besides 1) they have one distribution deal, and 2) they are discussing other distribution deals? That they're celebrating?	–
Barker, Gary (28 Apr 2011) "Shape of Apples to come: mac man" The Age PQ 865591170 TWL	–	–	There's just nothing about the company here except a few quotes from Raymond (the director of the company)	–

I think that's about it, unless someone wants to start digging through the dead tree copies of the Australian MacWorld and stuff. I don't see the point frankly, I find it extremely unlikely there exists anything meeting ORGCRIT. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:42, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Affiliated Foods[edit]

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

Fails WP:NCORP. There is also Affiliated Foods Midwest and Affiliated Foods Southwest so it can be difficult sorting through the references available, but I could not find anything that shows how this meets notability guidelines. CNMall41 (talk) 20:57, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Companies, and Texas. CNMall41 (talk) 20:57, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of companies in Amarillo, Texas[edit]

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

Unnecessary List. Some of these companies just have a presence in the city, not based in. We could add McDonalds, Taco Bell, and Starbucks to the list as well if we kept going that route. Currently there is a category covering the companies based there and at the moment there are only five. CNMall41 (talk) 20:50, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Lists, and Texas. CNMall41 (talk) 20:51, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per NLIST, these companies are not notable as a group for this characteristic. This list is short enough it can easily be addressed in Amarillo, Texas#Economy (with reliable sources). Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:11, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. the entire world has changed dramatically since this was created in 2006. Weyerhaeuser, for instance, sold its Amarillo assets a long time ago. Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and other techno visionaries changed corporate business forever. Whatever businesses are operating in Amarillo in 2024, it's unlikely to be this list as is. — Maile (talk) 23:49, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NLIST. Suonii180 (talk) 18:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MonkeySports[edit]

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

Fails WP:NCORP. All the coverage I find is WP:ROUTINE and doesn't meet WP:ORGCRIT. CNMall41 (talk) 20:27, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Sports, and Texas. CNMall41 (talk) 20:28, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Baseball, Ice hockey, Softball, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:26, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't see sources out there. This article reads as WP:PROMO. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:21, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Subject fails to meet the criteria outlined in WP:CORPDEPTH. The only sources I see do not provide significant coverage. Let'srun (talk) 03:02, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, doesn't pass WP:GNG. Suonii180 (talk) 18:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Chain[edit]

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

Company fails WP:NCORP. While several articles cited here provide significant coverage beyond trivial mentions, they are all in highly local publications (the Manistee News and the Traverse City Record-Eagle). Under NCORP, "Attention solely from local media (e.g., the weekly newspaper for a small town)... is not an indication of notability." A BEFORE search turns up no additional qualifying sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:06, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Michigan. Shellwood (talk) 16:42, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets WP:GNG. I think there should be more in newspaper archives - this company is very notable in its particular niche and most of the innovative things done by this company were in pre-internet era (it was founded in 1960). Nienders (talk) 12:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The WP:BURDEN is on the editor proposing material to prove notability; can you supply the newspaper citations? I searched archive sites in my BEFORE search but I only found local media coverage. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:58, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LYCONET[edit]

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

Fails notability with reliable sources being primarily about Lyoness. Related to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MyWorld. IgelRM (talk) 21:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Austria. IgelRM (talk) 21:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marti Group[edit]

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

No significant coverage in reliable third-party sources that establish notability. Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH. GSS ^💬 10:43, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Switzerland. GSS ^💬 10:43, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is a major Swiss engineering company. According to de:Marti Holding, their annual turnover is more than a billion Swiss francs. Anyway, a quick search in Swiss Google News confirms notability immediately: [2], [3], [4], [5]. —Kusma (talk) 11:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kusma: Thank you for finding these sources. Although I can't read German, Google Translate revealed that the second source is routine coverage with no significant detail on the company, and the fourth source is just a passing mention, both of which fail to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. However, the third one provides some depth about the company. The first source requires a subscription, so I am unable to review it; let's wait for others to check it. Additionally, it's a bit confusing whether the article is about a group of companies or an individual company, as the article on de-wiki is titled Marti Holding. If the article is kept, the title should be adjusted accordingly. GSS ^💬 13:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the articles will talk about what the company does, and go into depth about their projects, and not about the company itself. I think that should be expected of most companies, but especially of private and construction companies who are not usually in the spotlight. With that said, as Kusma noted, even information about the company itself can be found to establish notability.

The article is intentionally meant to be about the entire group, as I think that their internal company structure and who does what is not easy to decipher for the public and it's also not interesting. Marti Holding is a holding company that owns a lot of others, but in a sense it's just one of many official entities and less relevant. They call themselves Marti Group on their own official channels and that's why I named it as such. Fejesjoco (talk) 14:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A deal worth a billion dollars for a significant part of Central Europe's greatest infrastructure project may be "routine coverage" to you. To me, it indicates that we should have an article about this company. It is an embarrassment that we did not have one ten years ago. —Kusma (talk) 15:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the past hour, I added some sources found by Kusma and some others by me. These go in depth about the company so these should satisfy the notability and coverage depth criteria, much better than the average in this category. Additionally, since at one point you wanted to delete the article on grounds of being promotional, I added a section about a controversy of theirs, with even more direct news coverage sources. Fejesjoco (talk) 18:52, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (but I'm biased). With recent edits to the article, the concerns raised should be eliminated by now. BTW found another strong source [6] a university research project. The talk page lists additional ideas for extending the article, but even without that it should be good enough already. Fejesjoco (talk) 15:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 00:07, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Star Action[edit]

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

movie channel fails WP:Notability, the sources are only routine announcements with no deep or direct coverage of the company Assirian cat (talk) 07:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Companies, and United Arab Emirates. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 08:13, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect this and Fox Action Movies to Star Premium per past consensus regarding premium multiplex channels; this article should have never been created and the FAM title moved here, and this channel isn't going to surprise you with a sudden cooking show or comedy block. Nate • (chatter) 23:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The nominator has been blocked indefinitely. Geschichte (talk) 04:20, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 00:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Throne Wishlist[edit]

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

Only coverage is press releases/funding announcements. No secondary coverage. Probable COI. BrigadierG (talk) 21:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, and Texas. BrigadierG (talk) 21:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:52, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moxie Software[edit]

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

Fails the notability guideline for companies. Annoyingly the company appears to have changed its name several times (previously BSG Alliance and nGenera), so an AfD rather than a PROD just to make sure I'm not missing anything. Best sources I could find: [7] [8] [9]... "not great" would be an understatement. – Teratix ₵ 07:28, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, California, and Texas. – Teratix ₵ 07:28, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 20:30, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Airespring[edit]

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

Clear promotional content, and there is no significant coverage in any media that I could find, unless we are counting the "Telecom Industry News", which doesn't seem all that reliable to me. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 03:02, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, Internet, and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:09, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. The references are a collection of PR announcements and company soundbites. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 20:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Back Porch Records[edit]

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

Fails WP:NORG, was unable to find any significant coverage other than brief mentions. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 15:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Wisconsin. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 15:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge. I'm confused as to why this was taken to AfD at all. The nominator initially redirected it to a list page of EMI sublabels, which I reverted because it was not subject to any discussion, nothing was merged, and the target had no information about the label. The nominator then immediately brought it to AfD, when the obvious thing to do would be to start a merge discussion; I mean, for Pete's sake, this label put out full lengths from people like Frank Black, Shannon McNally, Charlie Sexton, and John Hammond Jr., so of course we don't want a redlink here. Chubbles (talk) 05:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:48, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. the record label has released many well-known songs (which Chubbies mentioned) and there is some important information currently in the article. Freedun (yippity yap) 23:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NORG and wp:sigcov. The signed artist do not make the label notable, per WP:NOTINHERITED.

Kion de Mexico[edit]

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

The seventeen years that the article on this company has existed as an unsourced stub exceeds the fifteen years for which the company itself actually existed. I would suggest merging somewhere, but only if sources could be found to support content to be merged. BD2412 T 14:29, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Mexico. BD2412 T 14:29, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:NCORP. I don't even find the sources that would allow a merge. Maybe a redirect to the parent company but I do not find a source to verify that. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:29, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Redirect: It fails WP:NCORP, but should be redirected to United Airlines per WP:ATD. In 2005 and 2009, it was listed as a wholly-owned subsidiary ([10][11]) and the 2010 John Menzies annual report confirms its assets were acquired by Menzies Aviation. XxTechnicianxX (talk) 16:30, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 04:11, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cursory google + google books search gives nothing for "Kion de Mexico." If any sources can be found it's probably sufficient to put under United Airlines. If someone writes a huge piece on it it can always be re-split again. I'll vote Merge and Redirect. Hopefully someone finds a source for it eventually? Mrfoogles (talk) 07:21, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete User:Sawerchessread (talk) 23:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

honestly speedy delete. wp:promodelete could have worked as well User:Sawerchessread (talk) 23:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Menzies Aviation as per ADT as the new owners. HighKing⁺⁺ 20:26, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @HighKing: I don't know that we have a third-party source for that. We do have the John Menzies plc, Annual Report 2010, stating at page 99: "In 2009 Menzies Aviation acquired the trade and fixed assets of Kion, a ramp services business based at Mexico City Airport, for a consideration of £0.5m, including costs of £0.1m". BD2412 T 21:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thumb Cellular[edit]

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

Fails GNG and NCORP. Sources in article and found in BEFORE do not meet WP:SIRS, addressing the subject directly and indepth by independent reliable sources. Found name mentions, promotional, listings, nothing meeting WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. // Timothy :: talk 01:14, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Michigan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:15, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why not try to add on to the article rather than delete it? I worked on it for literally 2 1/2 hours trying to find the most information I could on the subject. I did it right before I had to go to work too. Plus, there are many local cellular providers and local radio stations listed on Wikipedia that have been up for years, meaning that there is an interest in them. What makes Thumb Cellular different? Demondude182 (talk) 07:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the current rule is supposed to be that we can't trust what companies have to say about themselves. This includes pres releases, and most of the regular business announcements that you see, which are mostly just copy-and-pasted press releases. It used to be less strict, and the articles on those other local cellular providers were probably created back then, and nobody has gotten around to reviewing if they need to be deleted since then. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I see some WP:ROUTINE local coverage but nothing that meets WP:ORGCRIT. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm relisting because there is an unbolded Keep here from the article creator, preventing a Soft Deletion closure.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Guzema Fine Jewelry[edit]

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

The article cites trade publications and a Forbes contributor article. Some of the sources are about the person for interviews. I think this article is promotional and we need to demonstrate that it is notable per WP:NCORP. A G11 by a previous reviewer was declined so I will leave this for the community to decide. Lightburst (talk) 17:17, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, and Ukraine. Lightburst (talk) 17:19, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per good reliable sources and significant coverage in Elle, Vogue and local magazines and news papers. Added some sources --Assirian cat (talk) 08:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked for spamming. MER-C 09:47, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vogue: The First Lady of Ukraine Dressed With Pride to Meet President Biden passing mention].

Elle Elle Style Awards 2017: winners and party passing mention

We have a few routine announcements and interviews or interest articles about the Ukrainian owner.like this and articles about the founder but I do not think we get to the kind of RS needed for a notable company.

V$ Bloggy looking site with no editorial overbite that I can see.

I am happy to withdraw if I am wrong. Lightburst (talk) 13:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails GNG and NCORP, nothing found in article or BEFORE that meets WP:SIRS, addressing the subject directly and indepth by independent reliable sources. // Timothy :: talk 23:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The Forbes article is by a contributor but I see no evidence that the article is not independent. The National Jeweler and the mentions in articles in the New York Times should suffice as English language sources. Since I cannot read the Ukrainian source I am taking on faith that those are substantial. Lamona (talk) 02:55, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lamona: Forbes contributor articles are red-lined on perennial reliable sources WP:FORBESCON. Lightburst (talk) 22:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in addition to the mentioned references I’m adding the following good sources with significant independent coverage. Here is a good long read in KyivPost [12], a Space Magazine publication representing the jewellery industry showed the company in depth here pages 61-63 [13]. Also, here is a success story in the local top newspaper and TV channel ICTV [14] and here is an in-depth coverage from the other local newspaper [15] while here is the in-depth coverage from a business-oriented and highly reliable in Ukraine AIN.ua news site [16]. Here is also a good coverage from Vogue in English [17]. Also I’ve found a significant coverage in Polish version of Glamour [18]. Also worth mentioning is Vogue Singapore [19] and L’officiel Mexico [20] --Riva Pola97 (talk) 17:34, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked for spamming. MER-C 09:39, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. In addition, the topic of this article is the company - references that focus on a product (reviews, mentions, etc) or interview a company exec (e.g. a puff profile) do not establish notability (unless the reference goes on to provide in-depth Independent Content about the company- which they never do). For example, this in Kyiv Post is a puff profile on the founder based entirely on information provided by the founder and containing no in-depth information on the company - fails CORPDEPTH and ORGIND. Or this in cn.ua mentions the company briefly in passing and contains no in-depth Independent Content about the company, also failing CORPDEPTH and ORGIND. Or similarly this in Vogue, same reasons as above. If Valeryi is notable in her own right, then write an article about her, but these references do not establish notability of the company and I'm unable to identify any references that do. HighKing⁺⁺ 12:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stc Bahrain[edit]

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/VIVA Bahrain

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

Fails NORG; article lists standard business activities, nothing noteworthy. BEFORE shows no substantial RS. StartGrammarTime (talk) 08:35, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia. StartGrammarTime (talk) 08:35, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:38, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hart and Shepard[edit]

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

Fails WP:NCORP. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:58, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, Christianity, and New Hampshire. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:10, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per the Harvard magazine article and Union Leader newspaper article already in the article, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:12, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - While Harvard magazine and a single article in the Union Leader may be reliable for use in verifying facts, just those two citations together are insufficient for establishing notability. The two publications would appear to not have the circulation/audience necessary to demonstrate notability beyond a small region or special interest niche. The citations do not show that Hart and Shepard is anything close to a household name. CapnPhantasm (talk) 03:29, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed,Rosguill ^talk 13:58, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - anything from that period that is even being discussed today in magazine articles is surely noteworthy. An additional source: the "famous Dorothy cloak" made by Hart and Shepard is held by the Shaker Museum, and is discussed in Beverly Gordon's 1990 research paper "Victorian Fancy Goods: Another Reappraisal of Shaker Material Culture". A different take is provided by Antiques and the Arts ("Smalls Bring Big Prices At Willis Henry Shaker Sale" of 4 December 2007) which notes the high prices fetched by the cloaks. I am certain there are numerous other such sources that credibly establish the importance of this brand, back in its heyday. And "Once notable, always notable". Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Dorothy Durgin. An article on the "Dorothy Cloak" or the "Shaker Cloak" would appear to meet GNG as a standalone topic, but a topic on this organization/company fails GNG/WP:NCORP and therefore a Delete is in order. A search on Google Books for "Dorothy Cloak" provides lots of suitable references. HighKing⁺⁺ 09:53, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hexaware Technologies[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Tone seems improved but there does not seem to be any ORGCRIT eligible sources since the previous AFD. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:08, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, and India. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:08, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The previous version was deleted in 2020. This is quite a different from previous. I can see here significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources. And a listed company at National Stock Exchange and Bombay Stock Exchange. MeltPees (talk) 17:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You know, if all you're going to do is past a few specific articles from draft to mainspace and then show up at several AFDs eventually you're going to attract scrutiny like an SPA. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:16, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for spamming. MER-C 09:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Some sources are reliable but still do not help with notability, lack of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Fails WP:ORGCRIT. Wikipedia is not a business directory. RangersRus (talk) 13:59, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 01:26, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hypelist[edit]

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

This is an WP:ADMASQ of a non-notable app/company. Speedy deletion was contested by a new editor who claims to be a "fan" of the app. No evidence of satisfying WP:NPRODUCT or WP:ORGIND. The references all provide routine coverage and/or are from unreliable sources. Teemu.cod (talk) 19:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Software. Teemu.cod (talk) 19:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is my analyzation of the article:

Like said in the nomination, the article, especially the product section, is positive about the "mobile social application". Buzz words like popular and AI-driven are used along with a dose of ethos, stating that several celebrities use it.

The citations seem to mostly based in trendiness or promotion. For example, HIGHXTAR is designed to advertise to the youths. Trying to research the topic, most of the citations seem to be of the same caliber but there may be a few citations. Any additional citations should be analyzed. ✶Qux yz ✶ 20:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The topic is notable, as with Alfonso Cobo and related articles. There are sources from MSN, Conde Nast, Avenue Illustrated, and many other well-known sources. The article is meant to be a summary of existing sources, some of which might be bordering on the promotional side, but that can easily be fixed. There is no overtly promotional wording either, such as "award-winning" or "innovative" for instance. Moreover, this article satisfies basic notability criteria. MaghrebiFalafel (talk) 09:42, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Id looked up to see if there was any new news and didn't find any. Then given there already are some references in Spanish thought id see if there are other results in Spanish and there are:

https://www.larazon.es/tecnologia/hypelist-aplicacion-compartir-recomendaciones-que-necesitas-movil_2024020765c3721a9d142a0001894b5d.html https://www.elcorreo.com/sociedad/hypelist-nuevo-proyecto-exitoso-emprendedor-espanol-triunfa-20240415142712-ntrc.html They seem to say more of the same thing ie new app from this guy and it does xyz. I dont know if this helps establish notability. If the issue isn't the references, but the subject matter, so be it. If I had to vote it would be weakish keep but I also get the desire to delete. MaskedSinger (talk) 05:21, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak ~~keep~~ delete ~~It's all hype about hypelist, and it may be TOO SOON, but the sourcing is reasonable. If this app does not pan out, the hype here may not be enough to save the article in the future.~~ I looked again and the software has no reviews in the mac app store, and it only has one rating. All that we have are product announcements. I'm !voting to wait and see. Lamona (talk) 16:16, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If the sourcing might not be enough in the future, then it definitely won't be enough now. Alpha3031 (t • c) 08:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, your comment got me to look again. Lamona (talk) 17:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Seems almost A7, wouldn't go G11 though. Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:39, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 03:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The sources about the song can't establish notability, because notability isn't transitive. The only source I think could possibly establish notability is the Rivera article. The Vanity Fair article is an interview that contains almost exclusively quotations from the subject themself, and I couldn't immediately establish the other sources as credible. HyperAccelerated (talk) 21:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: As I have mentioned elsewhere, Hypelist is definitely notable and has quite a few users. It's widely used by now and many other applications with similar notability levels are also on Wikipedia. Redcrablegs (talk) 10:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just because a lot of people an app does guarantee notability. That's also a weasle statement: how many people are quite a few and who is providing these numbers? ✶Qux yz ✶ 17:39, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Came back here to see what happened since my first comment. I noticed that the vote by Okmrman was deleted and they've now been blocked for being a sock puppet. On April 30 there was a comment on his talk page regarding spurious tagging of pages for speedy deletion. That was on April 30. This article was nominated for speedy deletion by a somewhat dormant account on May 9. The speedy was contested and 9 hours after this was nominated for deletion the sockpuppet voted here. Not that this affects the vote here one way or another. Sock puppet or not, doesn't impact whether a subject is notable or not, but the powers that be may wish to cast the Okmrman sock puppet net wider and investigate the editor who nominated this article for deletion. MaskedSinger (talk) 05:58, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Liz @Yamla Looking at this some more, I'm now convinced that Teemu.cod and Okmrman are one and the same. MaskedSinger (talk) 07:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strictly speaking, they were blocked for disruptive editing and their other account was the puppet (they're the master). It is a little weird, has AfD always been this much of a sockfest? Alpha3031 (t • c) 08:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. It is peculiar. Then again, longer one spends here, harder it is to get shocked. MaskedSinger (talk) 09:00, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Teemu.cod is Unrelated to Okmrman. Just a bizarre coincidence. --Yamla (talk) 11:39, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ok thanks for looking into it. my apologies to teemu.cod MaskedSinger (talk) 11:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Companies proposed deletions[edit]

^ Kristen, Micael. "2048 Cupcakes".

[1] Kristen, Micael. "2048 Cupcakes".

[1]