Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tulip Interfaces

Tulip Interfaces

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Tulip Interfaces (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP – Sources are routine and do not provide in-depth, independent coverage, so notability is not established. AlanRider78 (talk) 11:43, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Software. AlanRider78 (talk) 11:43, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:53, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep : Why must we jump to the deletion of an article so quickly? The company has significant coverage in reliable sources WP:GNG: The article demonstrates notability under Wikipedia's General Notability Guideline (WP:GNG) through considerable coverage in multiple independent, reliable secondary sources, such as MIT News, TechCrunch, and Automation World. The citations provide in-depth coverage of Tulip Interfaces’ operations, technological innovations, and industry impact. These sources are independent of the subject, meet Wikipedia’s reliable source criteria (WP:RS), and go beyond trivial mentions, establishing Tulip’s significance in the industrial software and IIoT sectors. Also, there are little to no promotional issues (WP:V, WP:NPOV): The article contains verifiable information supported by a range of credible sources. Give this article time and let people work on making it better. Whoisjohngalt (talk) 19:52, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Not seeing any good sources to meet WP:NCORP; most of them are just routine business reporting such as fundraising and partnership announcements. The MIT News source is not independent since the business originated at MIT. It is possible that both the creator and deletion nominator are UPEs per this comment. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 03:04, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]