The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Participants have attained a consensus that the extent of sourcing available for this company does not meet
WP:NCORP at this time, despite it being a listed company. —
Red-tailed hawk(nest) 03:24, 5 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Only one independent sigcov source, doesn't meet
WP:GNG or
WP:NCORP. A search for other sources only returns trivial/routine coverage.
AlexandraAVX (
talk) 13:34, 13 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete – There seems to be a review on
PCMag, but rest of the sources are just press releases, it seems. TLA(talk) 04:38, 14 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep – Note: I am main author of this article. According to
Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), publicly traded companies nearly always can be established as a notable. This was also my understanding while I was adding this article - it is about company that can be searched in multiple investing tools. In this short stub-article nearly all sentences are with references reliable sources, but I am happy to add more, if needed.
Mlepicki (
talk) 12:21, 15 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, StarMississippi 14:27, 20 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Arbitrarily0(
talk) 02:31, 28 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Weak 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. Normally for listed companies we can locate detailed analyst reviews (which do more than report on stock price listings and forecasts and which analyse their business) which are a gold standard for notability but I cannot find anything for this company. The references posted by Mlepicki fails ORGIND as they rely entirely on information provided by the company and interviews with their execs with no "Independent Content" and fails CORPDEPTH and ORGIND.
HighKing++ 11:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete Agree with what's already been written. It fails GNG.
MaskedSinger (
talk) 07:04, 2 February 2024 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.