Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IdeaForge (2nd nomination)

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. ✗plicit 04:50, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IdeaForge

AfDs for this article:

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

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources, whether on or off Wikipedia, should be viewed with caution, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI. Apart from that, activities like revenue targets, profit/financial reporting, turnover news, capacity expansion news etc., are merely routine coverage WP:ROUTINE, regardless of where they are published. I am nominating this page for deletion again, as the last AfD ended without a consensus and took place over two months ago. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:23, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:23, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:41, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:39, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I came across several independent research reports like this, this and this, which critically and thoroughly cover the company. In addition to this, there is also significant critical coverage surrounding the IdeaForge drone fraud case, such as this and this. Chanel Dsouza (talk) 12:55, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Chanel Dsouza I would like to respectfully point out that the PDF reports you shared from HEM Securities and HDFC Securities may not be entirely independent. Both documents include disclaimers on pages 6 and 17, respectively; which clearly indicate the presence of "potential or material conflicts of interest". Also, they mention that "the firms or their associates may have received compensation from the companies covered in the reports within the preceding twelve months". Indian securities reports should be viewed with some skepticism, something I realized during Senco Gold's AFD. These reports are often prepared for internal use within portfolio management services, where the firms typically hold shares in the subject companies or try to promote a particular narrative, especially around upcoming IPOs. Charlie (talk) 17:09, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I won’t vote in this deletion discussion because the nomination and my opinion are very similar to what I said in the Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Apar_Industries. Charlie (talk) 17:25, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 17:36, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I cannot find coverage outside of routine business news updates that tend to be wire-style. I would agree that PDF reports from analysts are not reliable even if they are in depth as analysts often have a hidden agenda to convince people to pump or short stocks.Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 23:38, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Based on Charlie's analysis of Indian analyst reports lacking independence. Coverage mainly on bad conduct cannot be used to establish notability per WP:ILLCON.- Imcdc Contact 01:50, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete None of the sourcing meets NCORP criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 17:42, 9 May 2025 (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.