Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Companies

WP:DS/COWP: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.

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 other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Companies. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

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

MultiBank

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

Doesn't seem to pass WP:ORG notability guidelines. All three cited sources seem to be WP:CORPTRIV. Searching online, I failed to find any WP:CORPDEPTH coverage. It appears to be yet another Forex broker. A dedicated article seems to be premature at this moment. Vgbyp (talk) 17:24, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ingle International

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

Yet another promo page created by the same user. Doesn't meet the notability guidelines as highlighted a few years ago. Puda (talk) 15:29, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Travel and tourism, and Canada. jolielover♥talk 15:38, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ABC Software

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

Seems to fail WP:NCORP with a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:59, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Switzerland. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:59, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here some recent coverage documenting the company closure in the St. Galler Tagblatt. Probably still not enough to fulfill WP:NCORPbut many sources from the time before the EA acquisition might not be available online. If no other sources pop up, I suggest a Redirect to List of acquisitions by Electronic Arts as WP:ATD. Broc (talk) 11:26, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dreamverse

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

Non-notable development studio and contested WP:PROD. The article lacks quality coverage as evidenced by a strong lean on primary sources and user-generated coverage. The studio's individual works are non-notable. Generally has an LLM output tenor as reflected by the AI focus of the studio's works, relevant due to the extent of uncited content. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 05:49, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 05:49, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United States of America. jolielover♥talk 05:57, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Non-notable" appears to be very subjective here. According to Steamspy (https://steamspy.com/app/593730) just one of their games has an estimated 20000 sold copies. I would consider this "notable".
There is plenty of cited secondary sources in the references from people not affiliated with the indie company.
And "LLM output tenor" makes no sense.

DCorian (talk) 06:05, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Check out the WP:GNG if you get a chance. Notability has to do with the breadth and depth of coverage to substantiate the topic and is not really about the popularity of the subject matter. Please see WP:USERG for why IMDB and YouTube videos are not good evidence of notability. The only source here that is secondary and potentially reliable is an indie games zine about one of the titles the studio has created. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:14, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then what exactly constitutes "significant coverage"? How many "reliable, independent, non-user generated" sources is required for a topic to be considered notable? For the informational articles presented do not seem to be specific in this regard. (Further hence, why "notable" seems to be subjective here.)

Steamspy is not user-generated, and the data is aggregated from the Steam platform. Would this count as a reliable secondary source? DCorian (talk) 06:32, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let's make sure we are talking about the same thing - that [reliable sources + significant coverage + independent of the subject] support notability and not that reliable sources substantiate facts. The objective here is to figure out if a topic has recieved enough coverage to merit an article in an encylopedia so that its information is in-depth and reliably independent of the subject. Yes, its unfortunate it is a subjective exercise, but that is part and parcel of how sourcing is assessed and evaluated - the guidelines are Wikipedia policy and there is no small amount of guidance to help. Completing the subjective exercise with consensus of the community is the whole point of this discussion.

Depth of significant coverage for notability is laid out pretty clearly in WP:SIGCOV. Reliability for video game notability has some concrete examples on WP:VG/S, which suggests SteamSpy can be used to complement other sources when discussing sales figures, albeit that is not really coverage in any sense and wouldn't be useful to prove notability. On the number of significant sources, there is no hard and fast rule, but essays like WP:THREE make this point: if you were to take the best three sources available for the subject matter, would they strongly suggest it has broadly recieved in-depth secondary coverage? Unfortunately the answer to that question is fairly unambiguously a 'no'. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 07:27, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wikipedia is not an advertising tool; studios must pass WP:NCORP. This does not include popularity except as reflected by the amount of significant coverage from reliable sources. The third party sources appear to either be user-generated or unreliable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:13, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Primary and secondary sources exist (plenty of which are not "user-generated" and should be considered "reliable", see below). The studio does not have an "AI focus" as their content has been clearly available long before AI became publicly and readily accessible. Their focus has been primarily video games, which is clearly evident. So, this claim makes no sense and is unfounded, and is not relevant anyways as there is no stipulation against people or companies who might use AI.

Sources so far (not all inserted yet):

There is no reason for this article to be deleted, as it does contain verifiable third-party sources. Though I admit it probably needs to be written better to conform better to Wikipedia standards and all the sources used to be added. I am more used to finding and correcting errors than writing whole articles.

DCorian (talk) 19:17, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These are entirely user-generated sources, primary sources, or just not reliable. Please actually read the policies you are referred to rather than charging ahead with misconceptions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:56, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More than half are from data aggregated from the Steam platform (steamspy, steamdb, and stmstat). This is not "user-generated" as users and/or crowd-sourcing did not have a hand in the creation of the information. It is pure, unbiased data and stats. And the article from the indie games journalist and the entry in "https://www.moregameslike.com/" is not either, they are legitimate coverage of the company (or at least the company's games). I read the policies carefully. DCorian (talk) 20:04, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On the data, it just isn't significant coverage. If the best two sources are coverage about one of the games the studio made and not the studio itself from an obsucre indie zine and a generic description from a recommendation site with no author, far from the mainstream coverage sought, it is really, really hard to see how the sources establish notability. As you note, there is no coverage of the company, just the company's games. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 21:50, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds overly specific and unintuitive, as talking about what a company did/made is by extension talking about said company itself. One page about the company and the things it made that was covered by third-party sources makes more sense over several pages about the individually covered things the company made. But, whatever. I cannot find anymore sources specifically about the company itself than those listed at the moment after my digging (or at least those that are actively live on the net still), other than what has already been found, its own fandom page, social media, and website, so do whatever it is you need to do, I suppose. DCorian (talk) 23:58, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All the best with your future editing efforts - apologies it didn't quite line up here. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 01:17, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I initially found a few sources but seems to be a different company based on the website. I cannot locate anything meeting WP:ORGCRIT for this one. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:31, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – I attempted to search each of this studio's games on Google News through the query "Dreamverse" "[game name]", and was astounded to get zero results. Linked above are a lot of database entries and such, but I'm not finding any independently written copy-edited publications the describe this studio or its games. There's nothing for us to work with to compose an encyclopedic article, so deletion is the only option. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:47, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Looks like a nothing-burger. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 16:11, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Manuport Logistics

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

The secondary sources cited fail WP:SIRS, see table below.

Source assessment table
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.companyweb.be/en/0404534540/manuport-logistics	Raw corporate information, see WP:CORPTRIV		Raw corporate information	✘ No
https://tlimagazine.com/news/manuport-logistics/	Substantially an interview of the CEO, fails WP:ORGIND			✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20240913013030/https://www.projectcargojournal.com/business/2023/10/11/manuport-logistics-acquires-dynasty-shipping-europe/	Relays company PR materials, fails WP:ORGIND		Trivial coverage per WP:CORPTRIV	✘ No
https://breakbulk.news/the-cardinal-partnership-and-manuport-logistics-nv-forge-strategic-alliance/	Relays company PR materials, fails WP:ORGIND		Trivial coverage per WP:CORPTRIV	✘ No
https://portalportuario.cl/manuport-logistics-abre-10-nuevas-oficinas-en-siete-paises/	Relays company PR materials, fails WP:ORGIND		Trivial coverage per WP:CORPTRIV	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20240525042106/https://www.projectcargojournal.com/business/2022/12/16/manuport-logistics-pounces-on-growing-peruvian-economy/	Quotes from executives of companies involved, fails WP:ORGIND		Trivial coverage per WP:CORPTRIV	✘ No
https://www.importinfo.com/manuport-logistics-usa	Statistical data, see WP:CORPTRIV		Statistical data	✘ No
https://breakbulk.news/manuport-logistics-expands-in-spain/	Relays company PR materials, fails WP:ORGIND		Trivial coverage per WP:CORPTRIV	✘ No
https://breakbulk.news/manuport-logistics-have-opened-a-new-warehouse-in-spain/	Seemingly relays company PR materials, fails WP:ORGIND		Just photos	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20240919173537/https://www.projectcargojournal.com/business/2023/10/27/manuport-logistics-expands-into-africa/	Could not access	Could not access	Could not access	? Unknown
https://www.britishmarine.co.uk/news/2024/November/manuport-logistics-sets-sail-pindar-launch-new-nautical-logistics-unit	Relays company PR materials, fails WP:ORGIND		Trivial coverage per WP:CORPTRIV	✘ No
https://breakbulk.news/manuport-logistics-transports-two-helicopters-by-sea-to-chile/	Seemingly relays company PR materials, fails WP:ORGIND		Just pics	✘ No
https://breakbulk.news/manuport-logistics-transports-16-tonne-systems-to-saudi-arabia/	Seemingly relays company PR materials, fails WP:ORGIND		Just pics	✘ No
https://afloat.ie/sail/match-racing/item/65709-ian-williams-with-strangford-s-jon-gundersen-crowned-match-racing-world-champions-for-record-breaking-eighth-time-in-shenzhen			No coverage of the company	✘ No
https://www.mysailing.com.au/day-of-survival-as-quarter-finalists-decided-at-macao-match-cup/			No coverage of the company	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

JBchrch talk 13:35, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Belgium. JBchrch talk 13:35, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. With all due respect to the reviewer, I think it was a mistake to accept this(I don't fault them in any way, no one is perfect). The coverage is all routine business coverage. The writer did what most company employees do- they tell us what they want us to know about their company and what it does- instead of summarizing what independent sources choose to say about the company(WP:ORGDEPTH). I don't oppose returning it to draft but I don't think there is a high likelihood this can be fixed, which is why I came down as delete. 331dot (talk) 13:55, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:20, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Evoga

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

Contested PROD by User:Kvng with no sources given demonstrating notability. Company fails WP:NCORP with a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:30, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Mexico. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:30, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Rage of the Dragons#Development and release; lack of WP:SIGCOV, sources mainly appear to be videogame database sites and lists of game credits, which aren't evidence for per se notability. Pineapple Storage (talk) 13:03, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per Pineapple Storage. Go D. Usopp (talk) 02:11, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Rage of the Dragons: No SIGCOV in RS. Sources are only fan sites and videogame databases. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 15:29, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orbital Media

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

Contested PROD suggesting a merge, but the company made a number of notable games so there is no clear target to merge to. Fails WP:NCORP. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:29, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Canada. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:29, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Only cited source fails WP:SIRS and WP:ORGTRIV. JBchrch talk 19:30, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Pretty obvious failure of WP:NWORK here - nothing to source or describe other than the games the studio has made. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 00:42, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Go D. Usopp (talk) 02:10, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IguanaBee

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

Contested PROD by User:Kvng with no sources given demonstrating notability. No evident notability or passing of WP:NCORP. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:26, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Chile. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:26, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete cannot find enough independent sourcing to justify keeping article around. There are some good sources in spanish, but not enough from what I can tell with limited spanish ability. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 12:52, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to MonsterBag. Most notable original game from the developer. Go D. Usopp (talk) 02:09, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seriously, do a WP:BEFORE first. Spanish Wikipedia has a fairly decent article with RS. *sighs* --Bedivere (talk) 04:29, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
O... kay...? Your point being? Reliable sources without significant coverage mean nothing. The vast majority of sources in the Spanish article are mostly about their games and give trivial lip service to the studio itself. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:57, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Skull Island: Rise of Kong. Para ser justos, the Spanish Wikipedia page does have some good coverage even if that coverage was dedicated to furnishing a fairly straight development history. Looking at the coverage, there is almost an interesting and notable article to write here about the foundation of the studio and the poor conditions that gave rise to the disastrous release of Skull Island. But as it stands, that really is a single topic better dealt with within Skull Island: Rise of Kong. It falls short, sadly. Is there anything more broadly focused about the studio like the ABC article out there? Otherwise, strongly suggest not redirecting to MonsterBag: that article has obvious notability issues too. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 09:34, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Studio Distribution Services

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

The only articles I can find about this company are press releases. It seems it doesn't meet the notability requirement. JohnMizuki (talk) 19:22, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:57, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Television, and Entertainment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:22, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of significant coverage. However, the competition law angle could make it notable in the future. Bearian (talk) 08:11, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

VIDA Select

AfDs for this article:

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

No notability demonstrated. Most of the sources have passing mentions and do not refer to the topic directly. JohnMizuki (talk) 18:42, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Internet, and Georgia (U.S. state). Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:54, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:24, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sources in the article are enough for SIGCOV (GQ and Quartz articles are fairly solid). The article does have a promotional tone, especially the "Services" section, and needs to be trimmed down. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:39, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Looks like quite a few sources since the last Afd such as this which meet WP:CORPDEPTH. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:50, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tulip Interfaces

(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]

National Securities Depository Limited

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

None of the references provide reliable coverage, as they are all from WP:MILL, which only covers a single routine. CresiaBilli (talk) 07:43, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Maharashtra. CresiaBilli (talk) 07:43, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Squirrel Systems

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NORG and WP:GNG. Of the 12 sources, 8 are press releases. SOurces 5 and 6 are pieces written by an employee, Source 8 is dead but appears to be a piece about a non-notable award and SOurce 9 doesn't mention the subject. A search for source turned up databases, primary sources, blogs and UGS. Lavalizard101 (talk) 17:12, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Computing, and Canada. Lavalizard101 (talk) 17:12, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This is a brochure, and Wikipedia has no room for more advertisements. Sources do not confer notability anyways. MediaKyle (talk) 10:48, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:GNG. No valid secondary sourcing to prove notability. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 11:58, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the nom's analysis of the sources. Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:43, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete None of the sourcing meets GNG/WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability and I'm unable to locate any that does. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:05, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Akamon Entertainment

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

Little to no notability established by its sources outside of being a promising start-up and various trivial details. Go D. Usopp (talk) 12:35, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Internet, and Spain. Go D. Usopp (talk) 12:35, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH. Most sources are primary or mention the company only in passing. Despite some coverage, there's a lack of sustained, in-depth attention from multiple independent, reliable sources. Setwardo (talk) 16:05, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:23, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I only found a mention on VentureBeat, which does not speak to notability. IgelRM (talk) 12:14, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HOV Services

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

Fails NCORP, promotional. No reliable independent coverage - listings, puffery portfolio texts, nothing more. Jazzbanditto (talk) 11:10, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Tamil Nadu, and Texas. jolielover♥talk 11:13, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The only coverage is routine reporting from NEWSORGINDIA, which is not independent. Hence, the subject entirely fails to meet WP:ORG. Baqi:) (talk) 14:27, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aban Offshore

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

Fails NCORP as the sources are routine WP MILL and not provide in-depth independent coverage of the organization. Jazzbanditto (talk) 11:09, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Tamil Nadu. jolielover♥talk 11:12, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article fails to meet WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. The references provided are mostly routine financial reports or directory-style listings without any significant in-depth coverage from reliable, independent, secondary sources. The content reads like a basic company profile and lacks encyclopedic depth or lasting notability. Setwardo (talk) 16:03, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coforge

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

All the references are not of reliable coverage as they are WP MILL, only covering single routine fund raising or acquiring events. Fails NCORP Jazzbanditto (talk) 11:02, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, Uttar Pradesh, and New Jersey. jolielover♥talk 11:08, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Firstsource

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

Primary sources and no NCORP-eligible sources. Promotion and more promotion Jazzbanditto (talk) 11:04, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, and Maharashtra. jolielover♥talk 11:07, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lion Music

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

Cannot find any coverage on them. I checked also newspapers.com. Dupvegan (talk) 01:58, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Companies. Dupvegan (talk) 01:58, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Lars Eric Mattsson. This really should be speedy closed and a merge discussion started; this is a clear candidate and didn't need to come to AfD. Chubbles (talk) 06:16, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:22, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect to Lars Eric Mattsson, though this venue is proper as the article has no sources and procedure was followed in that the nomination has no issues in itself. This will be a consensus-based decision rather than being stuck forever in limbo on low-trafficked article talk pages. Nathannah • 📮 22:49, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shoreline Public Adjusters, LLC

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

Connected contributor. Recently started company in 2025. Non-notable. Frap (talk) 23:51, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Frap (talk) 23:51, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as clear WP:PROMO and company does not meet WP:NCORP.David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 03:05, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Florida, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:23, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interval Learning

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

Available sources on this edtech company are limited to press releases and unbylined announcements, which do not satisfy the WP:NCORP criteria. The article likewise carries a press release tone. Yuvaank (talk) 17:54, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Education, India, and Kerala. Yuvaank (talk) 17:54, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The references in the article are not reliable; only one piece from The Hindu BusinessLine is somewhat acceptable, but that too is just routine coverage. Therefore, the subject completely fails to meet WP:NCORP. Baqi:) (talk) 14:16, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Poor to unreliable sources. Not a single source is available which can be considered WP:SIGCOV or WP:RS. Zuck28 (talk) 05:16, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails to meet WP:NCORP. RangersRus (talk) 16:44, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hantec Financial 1

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

Declined 4 times for notability issues at AfC, then finally rejected with no indication of notability. Author moved to mainspace.

I see no indication this company meets WP:NORG qcne (talk) 13:30, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. qcne (talk) 13:30, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The author is a paid editor and should never have moved this into the main space past AfC. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:42, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete no indication of passing WP:NCORP paid marketing promotion. Theroadislong (talk) 13:44, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Hong Kong. jolielover♥talk 15:12, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails NCORP and creator needs blocked for the bludgeoning. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:30, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Agreed, fails NCORP and should be removed. I note there is a related article Hantec Markets which looks like the same company and could be merged, but that article is poorly referenced and still not meet NCORP and probably should also be removed. -- Sargdub (talk) 06:14, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Hantec Group (with the history preserved under the redirect) per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the target article. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future. Cunard (talk) 00:12, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I created an article about Hantec Group, the parent company of Hantec Financial and Hantec Markets. The parent company meets Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria through significant coverage in the Economic Daily News [zh], the Hong Kong Economic Journal, Sing Tao Daily, and the South China Morning Post. Cunard (talk) 00:12, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be fine with this. qcne (talk) 11:55, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:CORP. LibStar (talk) 11:54, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Temple Reef

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

Advertisement for the company Temple Adventures. As part of their diving tourism operations, they created some "reef" (by tossing debris and refuse into water), which is non-notable. Does not pass WP:GNG or WP:NGEO (or WP:NCORP for that matter). —Alalch E. 13:36, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Travel and tourism, and India. —Alalch E. 13:36, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per nomination. Fails GNG. Zuck28 (talk) 05:40, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revenue Analytics

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

No significant coverage to be found. Just a lot of press releases. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:15, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Georgia (U.S. state). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:15, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. jolielover♥talk 12:19, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sports Mogul

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

Lack of sources that prove notability. Basically it only currently appears notable for designing a couple of sports games. Specifically Baseball Mogul, Masters of the Gridiron (No article of it yet), Football Mogul and Baseball Mogul Online. As an alternative for deletion, an option could be merging the content from the articles of the games it has made into this one. If that is bad, maybe just delete? This feels like a tossup... Servite et contribuere (talk) 17:47, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Games, Business, Sports, Baseball, Football, Technology, and United States of America. Servite et contribuere (talk) 17:47, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The three sources given are the company's website, and two links about the game Baseball Mogul. The gamespot link doesn't have anything significant on it (here's what I got on the archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20210830220556/https://www.gamespot.com/games/baseball-mogul-2007/news/), the gamershell link says that Baseball Mogul was the best selling PC baseball game for two years in a row (https://web.archive.org/web/20080207062631/https://gamershell.com/companies/sports_mogul/374303.html). The second article could be added to the Baseball Mogul article. Per WP:PRODUCT, this article could be merged into Baseball Mogul (though that article has mostly dependent coverage). I've proposed Football Mogul for deletion, since it has only dependent coverage or insignificant coverage from IGN and Gamespot. Truthnope (talk) 21:40, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as sourcing fails WP:NCORP and regardless has nothing to say about the company itself, see WP:NOTWORK. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Connecticut. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:23, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete You could derive notability through a third party way on the games they produce, but nothing is talking about the company directly. This clearly fails NCORP and should be deleted. I also feel we shouldn't have any redirect. The term itself Sports Mogul could be a notable term. So this was always the wrong title for the article in the first place. Govvy (talk) 10:01, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Clay Dreslough, notable person associated with the subject. Go D. Usopp (talk) 12:31, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lacks standalone notability, and I think redirection is a bit of a stretch for something bigger than just one guy. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:53, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and Merge- to the more notable games I see is a good ATD, no SIGCOV caught my attention upon searching its current name, tried even to search for its former name Infinite Monkey Systems but seems to mostly turn up the Theorem than the game devs, did find this interview which I know is primary source, will add it here anyway as part of the discussion.Lorraine Crane (talk) 13:22, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/redirect to Clay Dreslough – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 02:24, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shriram Pistons & Rings

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

Sources are routine coverage of acquisitions, investments and share prices. Apart from this, there are only executive interviews and articles written after the demise of the founder, which do not provide significant coverage of the company. Fails NCORP Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 17:31, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and India. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 17:31, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Delhi. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:20, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Jeraxmoira already nominated this for AFD when I was about to do the same. 10 seconds late. Agrees with the nom. Fails NCORP. Thilsebatti (talk) 18:42, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:NCORP. Svartner (talk) 20:40, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there might be good sources online. Can someone find some? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 15:18, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article meets WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. Coverage includes multiple independent and reliable sources such as Mint, ETAuto, Times of India, CNBCTV18, Autocar Professional, Bloomberg, NDTV Profit, and Moneycontrol, which provide significant, non-trivial coverage beyond routine financial announcements. Additionally, the company has received notable recognition, is engaged in international acquisitions, and has a longstanding presence in the Indian manufacturing sector. There is a clear history, notable founders, and current relevance through leadership interviews and expansion activity. Setwardo (talk) 16:10, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They are routine financial announcements. If you have any specific ones, please share instead of just mentioning all the names that are in the article. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 18:06, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PC Chandra Jewellers

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

Fails WP:NORG Thilsebatti (talk) 18:05, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Thilsebatti (talk) 18:05, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of West Bengal-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:15, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:22, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article relies entirely on WP:CORPTRIV sources such as company announcements, brand partnerships, and press releases. My searches did not bring up any better sources. The article creator is blocked for sockpuppetry too. Yuvaank (talk) 03:51, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Lack of in-depth coverage. The current references are trivial coverage and fail WP:SUBSTANTIAL. Additionally, the material has an advertisement-like quality. CresiaBilli (talk) 07:34, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Draftify- Agreed with Nom s pointing out regards the sources being mostly non SIGCOV, casual websearch have yet to turn up anything of notability that caught my attention, strong presence in Google News though, so there is potential of possible SIGCOV I have yet to see, so not opposed to draftify as ATD.Lorraine Crane (talk) 12:53, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Morningside Records

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. toweli (talk) 17:26, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Denmark. toweli (talk) 17:26, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I found a Politiken article about the record label's closure: Indie-pladeselskab lukker og slukker. toweli (talk) 17:48, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- No SIGCOV hits so far in my searches as well, did also find something about the subject' s closing to note.Lorraine Crane (talk) 16:35, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ansarada

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

Does not meet WP:NCORP. The sources are not very strong, and the subject’s notability is unclear. The page comes across as promotional for the company. Oftermart (talk) 17:17, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Australia. Oftermart (talk) 17:17, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Management and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:08, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Article is rather promotional and lacking reliable sources. LibStar (talk) 02:16, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: At least a little more discussion would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:47, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MyLogIQ

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

Article about a company, not properly sourced as passing WP:CORP criteria. As always, companies are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on reliable source coverage and analysis about them -- but the sourcing here consists almost entirely of coverage of general business trends in which the company and/or its staff are quoted as a provider of soundbite or financial data.
But we're not looking for sources in which the company is quoted as a provider of information about other things, we're looking for sources in which the company and its operations are themselves the thing being covered and analyzed by other people.
The article also recently underwent a heavily advertorialized rewrite (of the extreme overuse of bolding variety) by an editor with a likely WP:COI -- but reverting those edits wouldn't solve the problem, as the older version wasn't neutrally written or properly sourced either.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt the company from having to pass GNG and CORP on much better sourcing than this. Bearcat (talk) 12:37, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Puerto Rico. Bearcat (talk) 12:37, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep — This is not a case of “passing mentions.” MyLogIQ has provided the underlying data for The Wall Street Journal’s annual CEO Pay Study and interactive graphics for more than a decade, a recurring use that goes far beyond trivial citation. Coverage also appears in The Economist, NACD Directorship, Agenda, and major outlets like Bloomberg and CNN, as well as academic sources (Harvard Law Forum, Vanderbilt Law Review). This breadth and recurrence across independent, reliable sources establishes clear notability under WP:ORGCRIT.

Note: I am affiliated with MyLogIQ (disclosed on my User Page). — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarketTrendsEditor (talk • contribs) 12:55, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Providing the data doesn't constitute GNG-worthy coverage. We're not looking for news articles in which MyLogIQ is the provider of information, we require sources in which MyLogIQ is the subject that other people are talking or writing about, and nothing short of that counts at all. Also, if you have a conflict of interest, then you're not supposed to be editing the article at all, especially not to advertorialize it or impose extreme and improper overuse of bolding. Bearcat (talk) 15:57, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Being hired by the Wall Street Journal and other media outlets to analyze data and then have that analysis covered in news media is not the kind of independent WP:SIGCOV that results in a WP:NCORP pass. Not seeing any evidence here of coverage that meets WP:ORGCRIT. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:10, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify a point raised above: the Wall Street Journal’s annual CEO pay study is not a case of MyLogIQ being “hired” for consulting. The Journal independently selects and publishes this work because of the structured datasets we provide, and it has done so for over a decade, producing recurring features and interactive graphics built on MyLogIQ data.

This is similar with the Financial Executives Research Foundation (FERF), which based its 2016 audit fee report on MyLogIQ datasets, and with academic publications such as the Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance (2020) and Vanderbilt Law Review (2022). These are independent uses and analyses, not commissioned work, and they demonstrate the kind of significant coverage and reliance that WP:GNG and WP:ORGCRIT anticipate.

On the point about WP:ORGCRIT, the guideline requires “significant coverage in reliable, independent sources,” which does not require a dedicated company profile. Harvard Law, Vanderbilt Law Review, FERF, and the Wall Street Journal’s recurring CEO pay studies are examples of non-trivial, independent coverage that satisfies this standard.

That said, I acknowledge my COI and leave it to uninvolved editors to determine the outcome. If consensus does not support a standalone article, I would support a redirect rather than deletion, so readers searching for the company can still locate it in the context of corporate governance data providers. Suitable redirect targets could be Corporate governance of public companies or SEC filing, since those topics directly reflect the areas where MyLogIQ is most frequently cited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarketTrendsEditor (talk • contribs) 12:32, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:36, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. jolielover♥talk 15:42, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tech Expressions

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

Fails GNG with a lack of reliable sources with sigcov. Go D. Usopp (talk) 09:17, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and United States of America. Go D. Usopp (talk) 09:17, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:40, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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. Sandstein 12:35, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Destan Entertainment

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

Fails WP:ORGSIG. Lack of notability not inherited from its products, with the page lacking any footnotes. Go D. Usopp (talk) 09:15, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Poland. Go D. Usopp (talk) 09:15, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As written, fails NCORP. Note that I've notified pl wiki VG wikiproject of this, in case someone there can dig up some sources (there is no pl wiki article). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:27, 19 August 2025 (UTC) PS. Update: editors there also don't see notability. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NCORP. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:16, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per nom --Setwardo (talk) 16:06, 22 August 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.

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. Sandstein 12:17, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arc Developments

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

Fails WP:ORGSIG. Go D. Usopp (talk) 09:13, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and United Kingdom. Go D. Usopp (talk) 09:13, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - One piece of significant coverage in ST Action. Not enough for notability. Articles in Amstrad Action and Amiga Power (pages 76-77) are more about the games they made, not the company itself. --Mika1h (talk) 07:41, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as an example of WP:NOTWORK, it looks like even with the suggested helpful background research done by Mika1h, the lack of sourcing or content about the studio itself fails WP:NCORP. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 08:07, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:16, 20 August 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.

Graphic State

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

Unreferenced with a lack of independent notability. Could not find any reliable sources proving its notability. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:59, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, United Kingdom, and England. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:59, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, unsourced list of games. Only found a book bio of Whittall. IgelRM (talk) 11:59, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:08, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1-2 Special

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

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⁺⁺ 14:35, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. HighKing⁺⁺ 14:35, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Zeibgeist (talk) 18:31, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:44, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. HighKing⁺⁺ 14:33, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. While the articles all have by-lines, they are clearly press release driven type pieces. Not much here that would qualify under WP:SIRS.4meter4 (talk) 04:06, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,

Salvio giuliano

16:25, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arxel Tribe

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

I failed to find evidence that WP:NCORP was passed. This was the only instance of significant coverage that I found. There are some sources posted on the talk page, but they seem trivial, tangential, or unreliable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:03, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Slovenia. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:03, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article in its current state is a fairly obvious example of no business-specific coverage per WP:NOTWORK, in addition to policies such as WP:NCORP. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 05:18, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Faust (video game). Most notable and well sourced article of the company's products. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:24, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They published or developed more than a dozen games, I don't see the point of redirecting to an arbitrary one even if it is the most popular. It would surely result in WP:SURPRISE for some. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:41, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect/Merge to List of video game publishers. Some of the content/citations could be added to the notes section there and this would not be a SURPRISE redirect.4meter4 (talk) 13:41, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: to reach better consensus for a possible redirect target
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 16:25, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - List of video game publishers is meant for notable companies with their own articles. None of the individual games are that well known over the others that it would merit redirection. --Mika1h (talk) 22:33, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Micronics (game developer)

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

This was AFD'd in the past and the article's notability problem still stands. Two shortened footnotes did not link to any readable material, two unreliable websites including Giant Bomb as sources and three sources reporting on said titles' sales where the subject was NOT mentioned in any way due to contract development led to their involvement not being well known. One source about Ikari Warriors for the NES that is a short summary of a YouTube video. Doesn't pass WP:ORGSIG at its current state. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:37, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Japan. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:37, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: The sources include reliable sites and books, and Giant Bomb is merely one of many sources provided for the company's name, not for any specific, unverifiable information about it. It was a common practice in Japanese game development at the time (see the controversy regarding audio credits attribution in early Capcom games such as Street Fighter, or the whole situation with Xevious' developer name being hidden) not to give proper credits to developers or even development studios, but that doesn't have to follow us into the modern era now that this information is actually known. Websites such as Hardcore Gaming 101, that I think go about as in-depth as you one in topics such as gaming, have covered this company and could be added as sources if necessary. Why the sudden urge to delete? The article could merely be improved with additional sources (including in the Japanese language) if desired, but the notability of the article in the context of Famicom history seems evident to me. --Dynamo128 (talk) 09:30, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The coverage in these source provide notability to the games mentioned, but not the studio behind them that is not mentioned in said sources. Independent non-inherited notability is the key here, of which this particular developer has next to none. The Ikari source isn't reliable either. Go D. Usopp (talk) 09:34, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just adding something slightly skewing on the side of Delete. Whenever you're covering a game studio in a retrospective, like Hardcore Gaming 101 does, of course discussion of the individual games (and usually only the most-known of them) will be the majority. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:24, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:SOURCESEXIST is not a sufficient argument. I do not see this significant coverage that supposedly exists. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:11, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:18, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The sourcing is not strong. Databases and blogs are helpful resources for readers but for Wikipedia they are user-generated research and not in themselves any indicia of notability. If you actually read the Kent book [1] you may be surprised to find Micronics are not mentioned at all; it's being cited on the inference that games they were involved in sold well for their publisher. So there really isn't anything here for now. The article itself says it all, really: Owing to the secretive nature of the company, often working without credits attribution, little is known about the exact number of employees and capital throughout most of its existence. Because there aren't any strong sources, there isn't really much to merge, but that is an WP:ATD option. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:33, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. Editing articles on retro games for as long as I have, there seems to be a lot of these companies from the 1980s and 1990s, especially Japanese ones, that developed a lot of widely-reviewed and known games but what goes on behind the scenes and the company is unknown. Manley & Associates, Eastridge Technology, Radical Entertainment (in their NES and SNES days), Sunsoft (sorta), Bits Studio, Bits Labratory (who did the Ghostbusters NES game and helped SquareSoft with King's Knight), Imagineering Inc., and Gray Matter. It really sucks and is an awkward situation, kind of like all those actors and actresses that get a LOT of supporting roles in several notable movies and TV shows, but barely any sources exist that are entirely about them. You would think, with how often Micronics ported Capcom arcade classics to the NES, info about them would be reported better than this. The reason my Delete isn't that strong, however, is that the best thing I could think of would be to include perspectives about their NES ports of games like 1942, as those do get a lot of coverage, particularly criticism, from journalists. This might just be because we're all living in the West and thus old Japanese sources are much harder to find, but given what we've seen, it's not satisfactory. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:21, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To add, an Archive.org search using the Japanese name of the company only gave me a passing mention in one late 1980s Japanese magazine. Far from satisfactory. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:27, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

H.G. Heim Company

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

Also nominating:

Speedy deleted G15. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 09:04, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating these articles by User:Dannnii0722 because they are sneaky spam for the company SYZ Rod Ends, and likely AI-generated. All of these articles cite this company's blog. I am not sure whether G11/G15 applies here. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 06:40, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:56, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Rose Bearings Ltd doesn't cite the company website but there are still issues with it being AI-generated. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 06:57, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note also that the picture uploaded by this user on Steering link, File:Tie rod adjustable steering link.jpg, states This file was created and photographed by SYZ Rod Ends and is released under Creative Commons CC BY-SA 4.0. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 07:01, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback.

I understand the concerns. It is fine if this article is deleted. I will look for more independent, third-party sources and recreate the article in the future in a way that better meets Wikipedia’s standards. Dannnii0722 (talk) 07:07, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated Steering link under G15; the other articles have extremely vague references. H.G. Heim Company cites a patent with the wrong patent number according to https://ppubs.uspto.gov/pubwebapp/static/pages/ppubsbasic.html. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 07:34, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Rod end bearing per WP:ATD.4meter4 (talk) 16:16, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Is there more support for Redirection and which article (or both) do you propose redirecting?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:18, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

British Caribbean Airways

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

Article has been tagged as needing more sources since April 2013; single reference that was there is deprecated under WP:PLANESPOTTERS Danners430 _{tweaks made} 15:05, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Aviation, and United Kingdom. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 15:05, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: there do seem to be potential sources out there, though so far I've found mostly passing mentions, e.g. [2] [3], not sufficient for WP:NCORP. I also note that there was an earlier airline with the same name that became a part of BOAC via BSAA, see [4]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosbif73 (talk • contribs) 16:22, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the solution then is to merge into the main BOAC article and redirect this article to the relevant section?

(Also friendly reminder to sign your comment :D) Danners430 _{tweaks made} 15:26, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about forgetting to sign, and thanks for doing it on my behalf. This article is about a short-lived airline from 1986, whereas the one that was absorbed into BOAC was from the 1940s, so we can't just merge the article there. If this article is kept and information about the 1940s BCA is added to the BOAC article, a hatnote would no doubt be the solution. Rosbif73 (talk) 15:33, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Don't fret about signing - we all forget it every so often! And ah, I get you now - I misunderstood your original message :-) Danners430 _{tweaks made} 15:35, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Caribbean and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:34, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep I've just looked on newspapers.com and there does seem to be enough coverage from newspaper sources that establishes notability - aware these can be very difficult to find through regular search engines, so highly recommend making use of the Wikipedia Library and requesting access for eg. newspapers.com as it has been so helpful to me for finding information on many topics! I will do a cleanup of the article when I have the time, but here are various examples of newspaper coverage: Staten Island Advance Sun, 09 Mar 1986 ·Page 86;The Palm Beach Post Fri, 21 Mar 1986 ·Page 17;San Francisco Chronicle Sun, 24 Aug 1986 ·Page 130;Florida Today Wed, 22 Oct 1986 ·Page 28;Press of Atlantic City Sun, 03 Aug 1986 ·Page 76;Hull Daily Mail Fri, 28 Feb 1986 ·Page 2;The Miami Herald Mon, 17 Mar 1986 ·Page 179 I would say this is a varied range of papers and they're all independent and reliable. For some of these sources, the coverage is less extensive and for others it is quite detailed, but all show a focus on the airline. I hope this helps and once again I will try to do a cleanup when I have the time using these sources! Greenleader(2) (talk) 20:26, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 23:14, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP. Given @Greenleader(2)'s findings I would say keep.

Dualpendel (talk) 11:05, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GR8 Tech

AfDs for this article:

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

AFD recently closed by a blocked editor (who owns a series of accounts that were used for Keep discussions). AlanRider78 (talk) 14:27, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. AlanRider78 (talk) 14:27, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cyprus-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:35, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:36, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This plainly meets WP:GNG / WP:NCORP via significant, independent, non‐routine coverage that goes well beyond trade press. The subject (the B2B tech arm formerly known as Parimatch Tech, now GR8 Tech) has been the focus of many media, with a here for instance Forbes Ukraine with an in-depth analysis of its scale, client mix, rebrand, headcount (~1,500), and revenue shock after Ukrainian sanctions on its parent company; that article alone satisfies WP:CORPDEPTH and is neither trivial nor routine. [5] Forbes. Coverage is not limited to industry trades: The Economic Times reported the suspension of operations, sanctions and an alleged illegal activity [6]. Here is the detailed editorial Vector media article dedicated to Gr8 Tech and all perturbagtions with indudstrial analysis [7]. Here is another good coverage from the tech media talking about closing, sanctions, activity in CIS.. [8]. Here is a big read from editorial Forbes team about Gr8 Tech on how they managed to rebrand and survive in recent years [9]. More and more are available under Parimatch Tech+Gr8 Tech online search [10], [11], [12]. Jungle archer (talk) 17:30, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:58, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Verlag Inspiration Un Limited

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

Can find no sigcov, only citations to books they published. What brief coverage does exist is about 1 book they published, "50 Theses on the Expulsion of the Germans from Central and Eastern Europe 1944-1948", which should have an article because it was a big controversy, but not them. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:51, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Companies. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:51, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Germany and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:43, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:11, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oberon Media

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

Disputed PROD, IMO due to a policy misinterpretation but discussion appears to have stalled. This studio fails WP:NCORP and lacks significant coverage in sources, regardless of the games that it has created. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:07, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Was covered by trade sites: VentureBeat, Gamasutra, GI.BIZ, PocketGamer. IgelRM (talk) 04:32, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, in a trivial manner that fails WP:CORPDEPTH. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:17, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Go D. Usopp (talk) 09:35, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:14, 20 August 2025 (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. "Coverage" made up of regurgitated company announcements clearly and obviously fail ORGIND. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:08, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MySyara

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NCORP due to the lack of reliable sources on the subject. The previous AfD discussion was closed with "no consensus" but brought up concerns of the quality of reliable sourcing used in the article. At the time of writing, the majority of the cited sources are routine business announcements, such as financing developments (ref 11, 12, 13, 14, 18, 24), acquisitions (ref 7, 8, 9, 10, 19, 20, 21), and business partnerships (ref 15, 16, 25, 26), that fail WP:CORPDEPTH.

Regarding the other, more substantial cited sources: Gheus noted in the discussion that ref 1 contains a disclosure for a paid article; the bulk of ref 2 is an interview with the CEO; and much of the text of ref 4 is based on the outlet's interview with the co-founders (e.g., "according to the business partners"). Bridget (talk) 13:33, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Transportation, and United Arab Emirates. Bridget (talk) 13:33, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 14:04, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Per @Goodboyjj: sources in the first AfD, looks enough for WP:NCORP. Svartner (talk) 06:54, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There were sources identified in the first AFD that passed WP:NCORP. I'd be willing to change my mind if someone creates a source analysis table as directed at WP:SIRS and demonstrates through detailed analysis that WP:ORGCRIT isn't met by analyzing both those sources and the ones present in the article in detail.4meter4 (talk) 13:57, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
4meter4, there are some immediately apparent concerns with those sources. Goodboyjj, the article creator, presented these links with the claim that they "establish notability", and that claim was not really analyzed or challenged during the AfD. Here is a source assessment table:

Source assessment table prepared by User:Bridget
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Forbes Middle East		WP:TRADES applies, as a business magazine associated with the Forbes brand	Forbes 30 Under 30 list entry honoring the founders and providing a brief business history	✘ No
The National News	WP:INTERVIEW applies; as mentioned in the AfD rationale above and that of the previous AfD, the article content (not including the Q&A at the end of the article) heavily draws from the outlet's interview with the co-founders. Uses phrases such as "according to the business partners".	but note that this is a state-owned newspaper and, per Financial Times, "is seen as a mouthpiece for Abu Dhabi's worldview."		✘ No
Middle East Business		WP:TRADES applies	WP:CORPTRIV applies, routine coverage of business development (based on company announcement); the lead states: "MySyara today announced plans to expand its operations and launch a new suite of services, aiming to provide car owners with more convenient and affordable ways to manage their vehicle maintenance and repair services." (original text in Arabic)	✘ No
Experience Abu Dhabi		travel blog which states in its website description: "Discover top Abu Dhabi attractions, events, dining, and travel guides."	WP:CORPTRIV applies, routine coverage of business development (based on company announcement): "MySyara’s full range on-demand services will be made available to customers in Abu Dhabi"	✘ No
Jawlah			WP:CORPTRIV applies, routine coverage of business developments; reports that "Car maintenance app MySyara secures $400,000 investment" (original text in Arabic)	✘ No
Zawya	marked as press release from company	WP:TRADES applies; "ZAWYA by LSEG is a leading and trusted source of regional business and financial news and intelligence for millions of professionals across the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and other parts of the Middle East and Africa."	WP:CORPTRIV applies, routine coverage of business developments: "MySyara launches the first cloud garage network in the UAE in partnership with Mobil UAE"	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Bridget (talk) 15:43, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bridget This is a good start. I suggest continuing with the many other materials currently cited in the article. I'll hold off responding until you are finished. Ping me when your source analysis is complete. Best.4meter4 (talk) 15:54, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@4meter4: In this AfD, 32 sources have been shown to not contribute to a GNG pass. What other (SIRS) sources would you base your keep vote on, given we've looked at the ones you're citing from the previous AfD? Bridget (talk) 16:40, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bridget you have not provided specific reasoning for 32 sources in a meaningful way; only the five listed in the table. If you wish to cite WP:CORPDEPTH as a rationale you actually need to do a SIRS analysis for every source in the table. Listing a bunch of sources in your nomination and then vaguely nodding towards CORPDEPTH without actually doing a proper SIRS analysis isn't going to cut it. It doesn't sufficiently explain your thinking. If you want to claim CORPDEPTH put it in the table and give us a real analysis of why it doesn't meet SIRS. There's a reason why we have the table at that guideline. Use it to your advantage. Best.4meter4 (talk) 16:46, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 20:14, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Capital Hotels & Apartments

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

Fails WP:NCORP. No significant coverage of this hotel brand in reliable sources. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 13:03, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Travel and tourism, and South Africa. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 13:03, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: as the article currently stands, only 2 sources are not dead, and one of those sources isn't particularly focused on the company itself, but rather a different hotel it was forced to by as part of a business rescue. – Daℤyzzos (✉️ • 📤) 20:40, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Recent edits to the article have added sources that may indicate the subject meets WP:NCORP, so I now feel draftifying the article is a more suitable option. – Daℤyzzos (✉️ • 📤) 20:45, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I do think it provides basic knowledge of what the hotel is. I can try add in some more information Joshilerox (talk) 13:19, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Joshilerox, the issue with the article is not that it fails to provide basic knowledge of what the hotel brand is (that would never be grounds for deletion on its own), but rather that the article fails to demonstrate notability as per WP:NCORP. That guideline states that A company, corporation, organization, group, product, or service is presumed notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. If progress is made on the article to demonstrate it meets that criterion, deletion will not be necessary. Hope this helps! – Daℤyzzos (✉️ • 📤) 20:32, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DaZyzzogetonsGotDaLastWord Looks like a G20-related event has held here, not sure whether this is reliable secondary source or not. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:56, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Liuxinyu970226 Thank you so much for the feedback; I will look out for some more reliable sources to make the page more trusted and cited. Joshilerox (talk) 07:49, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have added in new citations and this should hopefully emonstrate notability. Joshilerox (talk) 08:12, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Looks like they are owned by Warwick Hotels and Resorts according to this. No comment on notability at the moment but an WP:ATD could be selective merging which I will volunteer to do if closed as such. Just ping me. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:32, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:54, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:30, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PhotoBook

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

Appears to fail WP:NORG. Amigao (talk) 00:30, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Photography, Companies, Fashion, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:14, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This magazine is notable and has feaured interviews and many highly professional photo shoots and photography with notable celebrties and people. Eric Carpenter (talk) 23:37, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's basically WP:ILIKE. There may be a possible redirect to Mike Ruiz. IgelRM (talk) 23:22, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 00:23, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 00:32, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Mike Ruiz ~~Delete~~redirect as per below I'm unable to locate any sources that meet WP:NCORP/GNG criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 19:04, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mike Ruiz - Better covered on Mike Ruiz, as all sourcing seems to discuss the subject in the context of Mike Ruiz. Does not otherwise meet WP:GNG. Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 21:30, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The term "Photobook" is not a primary topic for the magazine being discussed here. PhotoBook (magazine) might be a redirect to Mike Ruiz though. Current content can be added to a new section on Mike Ruiz Asteramellus (talk) 20:40, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Might I ask what the primary topic is then, are you saying Photo book? IgelRM (talk) 13:08, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Companies

Companies deletion

Companies proposed deletions