Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Companies

Points of interest related to Companies on Wikipedia: Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Assessment – To-do

Deletion Sorting Project
(talk) Project page Lists (by ABC) Lists (by topic) Lists (computer-readable) AfD: Today, Yesterday Delsort scripts
v t e

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:

1. 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.
2. 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.

Purge page cache

watch

DTDC (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:ROTM company. Sources are routine business announcements and WP:NEWSORGINDIA. ShawMindMiner (talk) 09:32, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. ShawMindMiner (talk) 09:32, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MSV International Inc. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Sources are passing mentions[1], primary sources[2] or sources where they aren't mentioned at all[3]

The "notable projects" for the Worldbank seem to be (but correct me if I'm wrong) local projects where they made a bid for the project but it was awarded to another company???[4][5]

All in all, I couldn't find reliable sources about the company itself, only passing mentions in the context of road projects in India. Fram (talk) 09:16, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Transportation, India, United States of America, and Washington. Fram (talk) 09:16, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LearningRO (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Couldn't find anything in independent reliable source. Appears to be promotional article at the hand of public relations editing account. Fails WP:NORG after a quick WP:BEFORE check. Graywalls (talk) 05:29, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Products, Education, and Websites. Graywalls (talk) 05:29, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fanavid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

After a WP:BEFORE I couldn't find any third-party coverage of this company, just social media and a contract signed with the government. Svartner (talk) 17:34, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Brazil. Svartner (talk) 17:34, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stirling Square Capital Partners (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

A normal business that is doing normal business things with no real sources in 8 years. All sources currently in the article are primary. A quick before search shows nothing besides ORGTRIV mentions like M&A. Putting this article up for AfD because of the current WP:Articles for deletion/Gregorio Napoleone (2nd nomination) Moritoriko (talk) 15:24, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and United Kingdom. Moritoriko (talk) 15:24, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:37, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vizz Africa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Not a notable MVNO, references only at launch Update6 (talk) 12:38, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 12:48, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Freebird Games (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I am not convinced Freebird Games passes WP:NCORP. It has a dearth of coverage about the studio itself that isn't just about the To the Moon series, which doesn't have similar notability issues.

I do believe that Kan Gao, the games' mostly solo dev, is independently notable, per WP:NARTIST and various sources. [6] [7] However, he is likely notable under his real name for a biography article, not under the studio name for a company article. Thus, it would require a rewrite and has no bearing on this page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:24, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:24, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Holborn Adams (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Does not meet GNG and sounds a bit promotional. Uncle Bash007 (talk) 09:02, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Uncle Bash007 Thank you for your other message and feedback. I created the page because a link existed on another page that was red and didn't go to a page that existed. Wikipedia therefore suggested page creation and I have seen other similar pages so assumed this was fine so long as there are notable references available. The references are all news articles. I have made some changes in line with your feedback to make sure the copy is purely informational. It is not intended to be promotional but factual and I hope this improves it. There were also links on other Wikipedia pages to this page that should now work rather than link to a page that does not exist. Are these improvements suitable? Greenfieldsgreentrees (talk) 09:31, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 09:44, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Star Bargains (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Does not seem notable Update6 (talk) 05:10, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 09:53, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Barr Britvic Soft Drinks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Hypothetical merger which was abandoned in 2013, information on it is already in the two separate company's pages so no need for this article Update6 (talk) 05:50, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Companies, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 09:51, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Could be briefly mentioned in each article about both companies, I don't see much for the company that never was. Sourcing is only about the merger, nothing since. Oaktree b (talk) 15:47, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Instyle Furniture (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Seems to just be one showroom in Scotland and the only references were news of an administration, not notable Update6 (talk) 04:17, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:29, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TJ Morris (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Parent company of only one main subsidiary, not notable Update6 (talk) 01:09, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Home Bargains Home Bargains is their trade name and it's even mentioned in the lede, making this article superfluous. Nathannah • 📮 01:43, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Home Bargains: that article is written in such a way that makes it clear that TJ Morris is just the corporate name behind the Home Bargains chain. It's pretty telling that, as currently written, the separate TJ Morris article claims that the company owns several businesses, but the only other one besides Home Bargains to be mentioned in the article, Quality Save, had all their locations rebranded to Home Bargains over the course of a year after being acquired. There's no separate notability (or topic) here. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:20, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:20, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Creative Biolabs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This article was seemingly created and subsequently updated by employees of the company. I am unable to find any coverage in reliable sources that would support the requirements of WP:CORP being met. SmartSE (talk) 12:00, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. SmartSE (talk) 12:00, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Owen× ☎ 13:20, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This company exists, but I can't find any discussion of it in secondary sources. Fails WP:N. Angryapathy (talk) 14:39, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• weak delete: Very nearly notable, but I can only find PR items [8]. Many hits in Gscholar, but they're all primary/from the company or passing mentions (we used the company's product in thsi experiment). Oaktree b (talk) 15:46, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:16, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all, I'm affiliated with Creative Biolabs, and I've disclosed my affiliation on Talk Page and understand Wikipedia's conflict of interest (COI) and notability guidelines.

I’ve made suggestions on the Talk page, as recommended for COI editors. For example, I requested adding the company logo through proper channels, and another editor kindly assisted with formatting the file.

The article has been on Wikipedia for quite some time, and several parts of the content are now outdated or no longer accurate. Recently, we took the time to better understand Wikipedia's policies and recognize how sensitive COI editing can be. That's why we plan to improve the article gradually through the Talk page—updating information and ensuring that all content remains neutral and well-sourced.

We do hope the WP:CORP of the subject can be reassessed. If you're interested, please take a look at the Talk Page, where we've prepared new materials for review. We welcome your suggestions on whether the proposed references meet Wikipedia's standards and how the article can be improved accordingly.

Thanks for your time and consideration.

--Sherwinbrown1 (talk) 05:52, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I really suggest you read WP:Notability in its entirety, especially the parts about what significant coverage in independent sources means. You list a bunch of sources, but they don't confer notability.

Publishing in scientific journals does not confer notability. If it did, almost every academic researcher would have a Wikipedia page.

All the other sources you list are either press releases from Creative Labs (which doesn't confer notability, because anyone can pay a few bucks to send out a press release).

What you would need is a few articles written by independent journalists that discuss Creative Biolabs as the main subject of the article. A passing mention doesn't count; Creative Biolabs needs to be the subject of the article. Angryapathy (talk) 14:23, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trybooking (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The sources are terrible with not independent reliable and broad topic coverage. This is not a notable company, at least for Wikipedia. Let zoom to some particular sources: [9] this one is a routine announcement on the not very reliable and quite niche website; [10] the same with this - it's not a reliable coverage, nor a reliable website and we need multiple sources (not a series of news from 1 website). [11] this one is almost good, aside from the fact it's slightly overfocused on the citations from the company members, but it could be okay. [12] this one is a reliable but not providing significant coverage, some interview citations and general information focused on the 10 anniversary date. J. P. Fridrich (talk) 05:19, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 10:09, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mambila Beverages Nigeria Limited (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Doesn't look like this company meets WP:NCORP. The sources are all just business listing sites and no in-depth or significant coverage from independent, reliable media. Junbeesh (talk) 08:56, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Nigeria. Junbeesh (talk) 08:56, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -per nominator. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 17:30, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Applied Intuition (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Nothing to show how the subject company is notable. Plenty of WP:CORPTRIV and a few bits of PR fluff, but nothing WP:SUBSTANTIAL as far as I can see - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 00:05, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and United States of America. - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 00:05, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep. Applied Intuition has received significant independent coverage in reliable sources such as Reuters, Bloomberg, and TechCrunch. Easily meets WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:GNG. Move for speedy keep. 🟥⭐ ^{talk to me!} 01:04, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Redstar0005: It's all WP:CORPTRIV doing a Google for 'Applied Intuition {Reuters,Bloomberg,TechCrunch}'. If you have anything that's not trivial reporting, please provide it... - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 01:18, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi @Rich Smith, here are some! [13][14] (Reuters), [15][16] (Bloomberg), [17][18][19][20](TechCrunch). All of these articles are not just trivial mentions of Applied Intuition but are completely centered around them and their business activities. I could continue naming more satisfactory sources if you wish. I'm not sure if you were searching for the right things when you did, because all of these articles were easy to find. Again, I suggest that the article is kept. 🟥⭐ ^{talk to me!} 03:15, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Redstar0005: All of those are WP:CORPTRIV... 'standard notices, brief announcements, and routine coverage, such as: of changes in share or bond prices ... of quarterly or annual financial results and earning forecasts ... of a capital transaction, such as raised capital'. So again, if you have anything that's not trivial reporting, please provide it... - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 10:45, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi @Rich Smith. The articles from Reuters, Bloomberg, and TechCrunch provide non-trivial coverage by focusing specifically on Applied Intuition’s funding, valuation, business model, and industry role, not just standard notices or brief announcements. They include independent analysis and sustained attention, meeting WP:GNG and exceeding WP:CORPTRIV. Again, I suggest the article is kept. 🟥⭐ ^{talk to me!} 19:43, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep - Disclosure: I am an employee of Applied Intuition and have consistently disclosed this affiliation in all my edits to this article and on my user page.

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:28, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lexicon Branding (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

There is some coverage about its founder ([21], [22]) but none of these articles are directly focused on Lexicon Branding. Working with big brands is not enough to pass WP:CORPDEPTH. Fails WP:NCORP. Gheus (talk) 18:25, 24 June 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)} 18:58, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:08, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nom. there is also a suspsicion that this is a paid, promotional article. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 17:32, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Slyce Apparel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable clothing maker. The WP:BEFORE did not show this company to be notable for an entry. Ednabrenze (talk) 15:39, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Sports, Tennis, and Brazil. Ednabrenze (talk) 15:39, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Fails in WP:NCORP. It's not a notable brand. Svartner (talk) 16:00, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:13, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per Wcquidditch. 🟥⭐ ^{talk to me!} 00:30, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete not really notable, too soon. I checked the sources according to WPbefore, but nothing there. --J. P. Fridrich (talk) 04:37, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - it has some followers and customers, but the lack of engagement (3 to 5 comments per Instagram posting) and no reliable sources, leads me to suspect b0ts have been purchased. Bearian (talk) 01:28, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WhiteTie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable company, fails WP:ORG, orphaned article, there is no determined whenever going out of business. However, these sources are WP:SYNTH. Absolutiva (talk) 22:43, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Hong Kong. Shellwood (talk) 23:21, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:45, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - non notable company, not to mention, the article is pretty promotional in context. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 21:06, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It’s not a well-known company, and honestly, the article feels more like a promotion than anything informative. Sethi752 (talk) 16:48, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mondo Music Corporation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORP. No significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. The article is unsourced and reads like a promotional stub. No evidence of widespread notability, impact, or independent media attention. THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 19:10, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Africa. THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 19:10, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:23, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or at the very least return to userspace: This article has been tagged with the citations needed for WP:V since 2018. The current references are unfortunately inadequate upon first inspection: Ref 1 is probably primary, Ref 2 I can't confirm as it's a book and Ref 3 is unavailable. With less than 40 edits since creation in 2006, I think this article either needs to be deleted or returned to userspace. 11WB (talk) 19:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Further to this, I would suggest a redirect to one of the labels' artists. Unfortunately, the articles for Amayenge, Jordan Katembula and Leo "K'millian" Moyo are of questionable quality with both structural, spacing and referencing issues apparent in each. 11WB (talk) 19:58, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. doesn't have enough sources to establish notability. The artists on the label also have questionable notability.Darkm777 (talk) 01:55, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

XYZ Entertainments (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORP. The article lacks significant, independent, and reliable sources that establish notability. Existing references are mostly blogs, user-generated content and trivial mentions. No clear demonstration of lasting impact or verifiable prominence as a corporate entity. THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 19:16, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Africa. THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 19:16, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:23, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. doesn't have enough sources to establish notability. Darkm777 (talk) 01:52, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tabproduction Studios (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORP. No significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. The article relies on self-published content (e.g., Facebook pages), lacks citations, and reads as promotional. No evidence of notability as a recording studio or label. THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 19:19, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 19:19, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Companies. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:23, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I considered a redirect to an article for The Super, which appears to be the most notable thing about this company, but there's just not enough for the film either. TheDeafWikipedian (talk) 20:44, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Does The Super have its own article? 11WB (talk) 21:03, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

YachtWay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Soft deleted back in May. A WP:BEFORE finds nothing meeting WP:ORGCRIT. There are some mentions, unreliable sources, press releases, and routine coverage you would find with a company but nothing that meets WP:CORPDEPTH. CNMall41 (talk) 16:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Transportation, Websites, and Florida. Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 17:43, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE not notable. mentions found are WP:ORGTRIV Dualpendel (talk) 19:34, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: No WP:SIGCOV, so fails notability checks. - UtherSRG (talk) 01:01, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: The article doesn't appear to meet basic notability requirements. MaggieT19 (talk) 09:09, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mamaison Hotels & Residences (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Article created by WP:SPA. References provided do not meet WP:GNG or WP:ORG, as these are all directly from the company itself. Unable to locate significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. C679 10:36, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Czech Republic, and Hungary. C679 10:36, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Travel and tourism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:42, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as purely promotional. Jdcooper (talk) 13:03, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Denver perfume (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

A promotional article for a non-notable company, recreated after soft deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denver Perfume. (Note that this article has a lowercase p, perhaps on purpose, and thus the previous deletion is not in its logs.) The sources are all paid placement, unbylined WP:NEWSORGINDIA stuff that fails WP:CORPDEPTH and thus WP:NCORP. (One source is WP:PRIMARYSOURCE Q&A interview with the founder that's also highly promotional.) A WP:BEFORE search turns up more of the same but nothing that contributes to notability. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:55, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Delhi. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:55, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Courtesy ping to @KH-1 as the sole participant in the prior discussion. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:56, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:03, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not notable; not even notable for paying for influencer marketing from notable people. Covert ad. FalconK (talk) 01:38, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no reliable sources. A gentle reminder that we are a charity, at risk of losing our financial stability due to spam like this. Bearian (talk) 16:18, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Perfect example of how WP:NEWSORGINDIA can apply to companies when paying for media placements fails to show notability for Wikipedia. --CNMall41 (talk) 07:45, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mwebantu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The article does not meet Wikipedia’s General Notability Guideline. It lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Most citations are from blogs, press releases, or user-generated content, which do not establish encyclopedic notability. The tone is promotional and may reflect a conflict of interest. Without multiple independent in-depth sources, this article does not warrant a standalone entry. Icem4k (talk) 17:13, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Companies, Websites, and Africa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:44, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Scholarly sources analyze this media source as a major news source for Zambia, for better or worse. See [23], [24]. The article is in dire need of cleanup but there are fortunately a lot of scholarly sources with which to write a balanced article. Probably the company's marketing team will not like the article that gets written though. Marked with cleanup tags; I may be able to help clean this once the AfD is over. FalconK (talk) 01:44, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: One academic paper, no matter how well-researched, is not sufficient to demonstrate lasting notability per WP:GNG. There's no mainstream or sustained coverage from reliable, independent secondary sources. Mwebantu is not profiled by any major media outlets, has no significant awards, and no long-term impact demonstrated in third-party sources. Cleanup cannot substitute for notability.--THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 18:15, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I agree that cleanup and notability are orthogonal, but I suspect the desire to delete this article is in large part due to the absolute mess the article is. The sources discussing it, many of which are very critical of its coverage, are considerably more than one single academic paper. I found two after searching for less than 5 minutes. It is also treated in [25], and described in Matambo, E. (2025). Zambia's Youths and the 2021 General Election. I would agree it is marginal and the article would be both completely different from this one and much shorter, but unfortunately this site seems to be a reasonably major part of Zambia's media landscape. FalconK (talk) 22:31, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Power-Packer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Does not meet WP:ORG. I could find no significant coverage by independent sources. 331dot (talk) 16:21, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, Transportation, and Netherlands. 331dot (talk) 16:21, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge (selectively) into its parent Enerpac Tool Group as an ATD. gidonb (talk) 17:09, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Enerpac Tool Group, but this is a bit of a mess. Together, those articles both reflect likely COI and have next to no encyclopedic content or value. I'm not entirely sure Enerpac Tool Group should be kept either (see WP:LISTED). FalconK (talk) 01:46, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I believe Enerpac should also be merged into Enerpac Tool Group, the combined article should be cleaned up and moved to Enerpac. Terrible fragmentation here. By pulling all these companies together, NCORP is met. gidonb (talk) 02:01, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Enerpac Tool Group makes the most sense here. That way you get the most information and the highest likelihood that it meets WP:GNG. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 13:30, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Green Monkey Records (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I do not believe this indie record label passes WP:GNG. The article as written is mostly referenced to primary sources or blogs. I could not find much coverage in my own search, just a couple short articles from local newspapers found on newspapers.com. Mbdfar (talk) 14:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Washington. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:06, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm in the process of finding WP:IRS and was able to find one today from The Rocket magazine https://washingtondigitalnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=RCT19860401.1.9&srpos=2&e=-------en-20-RCT-1--txt-txIN-green+monkey+records------ I assume it is acceptable. If not please let me know. I will add more content and WP:IRS as time permits. I am fairly new here as far as contributing. Otheriver (talk) 23:49, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I do consider that a WP:RS, but more will be needed to satisfy WP:GNG or WP:NCORP. Consider WP:AUD – The Rocket at the time was a small, Seattle-based music magazine. My search also turned up some additional The Rocket articles, but are you able to find additional sources that cover the subject in-depth? Mbdfar (talk) 18:55, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm not sure yet. I'm still at the beginning of my research. I was going to check a Seattle Times article the same day, but it was behind a paywall. I have some other places I need to check and read yet. Otheriver (talk) 01:59, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep there are enough sources to establish notability given that there is less media available online from that time frame. Also the label had a few established acts. Darkm777 (talk) 18:51, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Where are these sources that establish notability? Mbdfar (talk) 19:09, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I had tagged this in 2023 and see nothing that has taken place since that time to establish notability (a quick BEFORE search finds nothing meeting WP:CORPDEPTH. As far as "there is less media available online from that time frame" - what time frame? The 1980s? We have archives and I searched those as well. Didn't find what is necessary to show WP:NCORP. --CNMall41 (talk) 07:52, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WinZO (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Issues from previous AfDs have not been resolved in this recent recreation of the article. Namely, the sources still do not meet WP:CORPDEPTH and thus fail to establish notability. Also, the third AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winzo was mistakenly closed as "soft delete", as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WinZO and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WinZO (2nd nomination) already previously existed. GTrang (talk) 04:34, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The current version of the article shows clear evidence of notability per WP:CORPDEPTH. Unlike the earlier drafts, it now includes substantial independent coverage from major, reliable news sources such as Reuters, Economic Times, Forbes India, and Inc42. These sources discuss not just funding or product launches, but significant developments like legal disputes with Hike, an antitrust complaint against Google being investigated by the Competition Commission of India, and real-world policy engagement around platform regulations.

The company has also shown measurable financial success. It reported over ₹1,000 crore in revenue in FY 2023–24 and a profit of over ₹300 crore, which is independently reported and verifiable. The platform is expanding internationally, including a $25 million investment to launch in Brazil, again covered by independent sources.

The article now meets notability criteria because it documents more than routine coverage, it includes sustained, in-depth reporting on conflicts, legal challenges, and its role in shaping digital policy. This is a notable player in India's online gaming and digital economy space. Previous concerns about PR-heavy content or lack of depth no longer apply. Recommend retaining the article. Sahi1up (talk) 05:12, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't use an WP:LLM rationale. Nathannah • 📮 20:14, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, Websites, and Delhi. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:04, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games, Companies, and India. AllyD (talk) 07:04, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The applicable guideline for this page since it is a company would be WP:ORGCRIT. None of the sources fall under that as they are all churnalism, NEWSORGINDIA, or otherwise unreliable. LKBT (talk) 09:53, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and salt Fails WP:ORGCRIT. Repeated recreations suggest a need to WP:SALT the page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:47, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and salt all material seems promotional. we are now at afd #4, so salting is necessary Bluethricecreamman (talk) 14:47, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I see some press release type articles, but there are enough sources to establish notability.Darkm777 (talk) 18:57, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and salt. What sources? I can only see press releases, incidental mentions, and quotations. Searched for a bit in Scholar and Proquest. FalconK (talk) 01:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Falcon Kirtaran I don't see any press releases. Several citations are actually down, so I cannot say if they are press releases, but besides those we have a few that are not press release, such as Financial Express, EconomicTimes, and Inc24. Which do you refer to as a press release? Press release should clearly state that it is a press release and often has company info such as the ABOUT section and contact info on the bottom. Maybe you are mistaking articles that were written based on announcements, but in my opinion an article written based on company announcement as long as not copied word by word is considered a legit coverage. If that was not the case, majority of of wiki articles should be deleted. For example if Apple announced a new OS, should all the articles written about it be considered a press release, hence we should not have such articles used as a citation? I see that I may be in the minority opinion here, but if I am wrong, please point me out the proper Wiki policy regarding what is considered a press release. Darkm777 (talk) 01:37, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Press releases often do not directly state that they are a press release, but they generally present single-source un-analyzed factual information that is ultimately sourced from the company's own announcement. Often times, news outlets will republish press releases verbatim or nearly verbatim; this does not amount to notability.

There are a great, great many Wikipedia articles about companies that should be deleted, because for some reason many people view it as important that their company have a Wikipedia article. This, as decided before so many times, is one of them. It is for this that salt is the right answer.

The Financial Express article you post is a perfect example of a dependent reference published by a media outlet. It does not go to notability because it would need to be an independent source. A dependent source is one that relies primarily on the subject itself as a source for information; that article is mostly literal quotes from the subject. The second article I cannot read. The third, from Inc24, is different; it is a dependent source of WinZo and Hike together, and describes only the lawsuit; the single event does not make for significance. In general there should be many sources about many different topics. That is part of why this article is so commonly deleted. I am amending my !vote to include salt. FalconK (talk) 08:27, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete AND SALT per nom. Not much improvement from its previous versions on mentioned issues if possible, while also repeatedly recreated enough to deserve salting. MimirIsSmart (talk) 03:26, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong delete and salt for two reasons. I checked every reference. First, the company might or might not meet WP:GNG if it were not a for-profit company. Since it's for profit, the company has to meet the much higher standards of WP:NCORP; none of the working links do this.

Second, and more worrisome, at least half the links (which are all new) don't work. This tells me this is basically a fraudulent, unreliable article, whatever the notability. We absolutely can't have fake referencing in Wikipedia -- it's almost an existential threat. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:51, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Author comment – → Delete and Salt – I am the original author of this article. After reconsideration, I no longer believe the subject meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines. I now support deletion and also recommend salting the title to prevent recreation. I also apologize for the poor quality of references; several are not working or fail to meet reliability standards. Thank you. Sahi1up (talk) 04:35, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Material Sciences Corporation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

N/C in 2017, and I think it's time for another look as corp depth still does not appear to be there in WP:SIRS Star Mississippi 03:01, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, Technology, United States of America, and Michigan. Star Mississippi 03:01, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All of the sources are very normal corporate business sources, not ones that establish notability by Wikipedia standards. PickleG13 (talk) 04:26, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
  1. "Profile: Material Sciences Corporation". Noise & Vibration Worldwide. 38 (7). Sage Publishing: 21–22. July 2007. doi:10.1260/0957-4565.38.7.21. EBSCOhost 26045472.

     According to this page, Noise & Vibration Worldwide is a peer-reviewed journal. The article notes: "Material Sciences Corporation provides material-based solutions for acoustical and coating applications that address noise, temperature problems in the automotive, HVAC, electronics, power equipment, and construction industries. Founded in 1971 the company now has 600 employees in the US, Europe, and Asia and a network of partners on four continents. In fiscal 2006, MSC had net sales of $287 million and net income of $5.2 million. MSC has one of the largest independent sound engineering laboratories in North America, an application research centre located in Canton, MI."

  2. Nelson, Brett (2003-01-24). "Shhh! Struggling Material Sciences is betting its future on a dated feat of metallurgy called "quiet" steel. Your Ford pickup may have it". Forbes. Archived from the original on 2025-06-05. Retrieved 2025-06-21.

     The article notes: "In April, 17 years in upper management at Quaker Oats, Whirl-pool and FMC Corp., the jovial, 64-year-old Michael Callahan gave up retirement and the occasional consulting gig to run a sleepy manufacturer that last year netted $2.2 million pretax on $267 million in sales. Material Sciences Corp. of Elk Grove Village, Ill. was formed in 1971 to buy companies inventing new materials. Most never took off, but it managed to go public in 1984 on the back of a unit that had found a fast way to paint the raw steel and aluminum used to make car bodies, roofing and garage doors. Coil coating–which involves priming metal rolls weighing up to 50,000 pounds with absorbent chemicals, then painting them at up to 700 feet per minute on a mill–accounts for two-thirds of the company’s revenues. ... Mat Sci’s big break didn’t come until 1998 when it began supplying the steel firewall between the dashboard and the engine for the 1999 Ford Explorer Sport Trac pickup truck. That win helped land a contract for the same part, and another one for a quiet-steel oil pan, on Ford’s new F-150 pickup. Today the company has contracts at each of the Big Three and is pursuing more than 150 new auto deals. ... As for competition, Material Sciences is far and away the dominant supplier of damped steel for autos–perhaps a $600 million market."

  3. Nelson, Brett (2000-10-30). "So What's Your Story?". Forbes. Archived from the original on 2025-06-05. Retrieved 2025-06-21.

     The article notes: "Directions aren’t always necessary. Chicago-based Material Sciences Corp., a $500 million (sales) maker of laminated metal and films, had eight analysts following it in 1995. Only two remain. A nasty confluence of missed earnings, brokerage attrition and shrinking market cap (now $170 million) took its toll. Publicly traded since 1984, Material Sciences has spent $1 million on promotional help over the past five years, to no effect. Perhaps shedding the money losing steel-galvanizing line–and focusing solely on profitable products such as anti-vibrational-steel car components and window films that reject solar heat–will spark Wall Street’s interest."

  4. Englander, David (2013-04-03). "Primed for "Material" Gains". Barron's. Archived from the original on 2017-03-22. Retrieved 2025-06-21.

     The article notes: "With a market cap of $104 million, and only two sell-side analysts covering its stock, Material Sciences floats under the radar of most investors. Material Sciences (ticker: MASC) makes specialty materials, primarily for the automotive industry. Its metal coatings are used on car bodies and parts. The company is perhaps best known for its Quiet Steel product, which reduces noise and vibrations in cars and appliances. In the last year, Material Sciences hit a rough patch. Sales have declined, due to lower shipments of metal fuel tanks, as Ford has converted some of its vehicles to plastic tanks. ... Based in Elk Grove Village, Ill., Material Sciences' sales are roughly split between its acoustical materials like Quiet Steel and Quiet Aluminum, and its coated metal products, which include electrogalvanized materials, as well as ElectroBrite, an alternative to stainless steel in appliances. Major customers include U.S. Steel, Chrysler and Ford."

  5. Dinger, Ed (2004). "Material Sciences Corporation". In Grant, Tina (ed.). International Directory of Company Histories. Vol. 64. Detroit, Michigan: St. James Press. ISBN 1558625666. Archived from the original on 2025-06-05. Retrieved 2025-06-21 – via Encyclopedia.com.

     From Cengage.com:

     When students, job candidates, business executives, historians and investors need accurate and detailed information on the development of any of the world's largest and most influential companies, direct them to International Directory of Company Histories. This multi-volume work is the first major reference to bring together histories of companies that are a leading influence in a particular industry or geographic location.

     The book notes:

     Public Company

     Incorporated: 1971

     Employees: 740

     Sales: $266.8 million (2003)

     Stock Exchanges: New York

     Ticker Symbol: MSC

     NAIC: 332812 Metal Coating, Engraving (Except Jewelry and Silverware), and Allied Services to Manufacturers
     
     Material Sciences Corporation (MSC) is a publicly traded company based in Elk Grove, Illinois. It designs, manufactures, and markets materials-based solutions for electronic, acoustical/thermal, and coated metal applications. MSC's metal laminate product, NRGDamp, is used in the electronics industry to reduce noise and vibrations in hard disk drives. The company also produces Quiet Steel, used by the auto industry to reduce noise and vibration. The material has been applied primarily in dash panels but is also being used in an increasing number of other applications such as wheel wells and floor pans. In addition, MSC's high-speed coated metal operation produces painted and electrogalvanized sheet metal for use in building and construction products, automobile exterior panels, and appliances such as refrigerators and freezers. MSC also makes sensors and switches, relying on its patented field effect technology, for the automotive, recreational vehicle, marine, and consumer electronics markets.
     
     Founding the Company in 1971
     
     MSC was founded in 1971 as a holding company to acquire businesses involved in advanced materials technologies. The most important of these companies, and the only one in the fold when the company went public in 1984, was Pre Finish Metals. It was originally known as All Weather Steel Products, founded in Chicago in 1951 by Roy Crabtree. The company started out applying protective aluminum paint to sheets of metal, used to make air ducts for heating and air conditioning systems. The demand for the product grew so rapidly that All Weather soon dropped sheet processing in favor of continuous coil coating. In 1954 the operation was transferred to a converted mushroom barn in Des Plaines, Illinois, where new coil processing equipment was installed to meet ever increasing demand. Then, in May 1958, sawdust insulation in the roof ignited spontaneously and the subsequent explosion and fire completely destroyed the building. All Weather's management took immediate steps to establish a new production facility and preserve the company's customer base. Three competitors agreed to fill outstanding orders, with All Weather's personnel dispatched to oversee production. ...

     The book provides extensive discussion of the subject.
  6. International Directory of Company Histories also provides a "Further Reading" section that provides more sources about Material Sciences Corporation:

     Arndorfer, James B., "Gabelli Groups Turn Up Heat on Metal Firms," Crain's Chicago Business, June 2, 2003, p. 3.

     Keefe, Lisa M., "Metal Firm Is Up for Sale," Crain's Chicago Business, July 2, 1990, p. 70.

     Murphy, H. Lee, "Bad Timing Snarls Material Sci. Deal," Crain Chicago Business, July 19, 1999, p. 36.

     Nelson, Brett, "Shhh!," Forbes, November 24, 2003, p. 84.

     Savitz, Eric J., "A Fresh Shine," Barron's, November 4, 1991, p. 14.

     Setton, Dolly, "Steel Deal," Forbes, October 18, 1999, p. 190.

     Troxell, Thomas N., Jr., "Tripod for Growth," Barron's, July 1, 1985, p. 33.

  7. Hoover's had an industry report about Material Sciences Corporation under a paywall at http://www.hoovers.com/company-information/cs/company-report.material_sciences_corporation.f622bdcf9e26730a.html. The summary notes: "Material Sciences Corporation, known as MSC, makes engineered materials, as well as coated steel and electro-galvanized steel products. MSC has two primary product segments: acoustical (anti-noise and vibration products, including the trademarked Quiet Steel reduced vibration metal) and coated (decorative and protective metal coatings). The company's products are used by the appliance, automotive, building systems, computer, construction, furniture, HVAC, lighting, and telecommunications industries. Automobile manufacturers are among the company's largest clients. MSC gets most of its sales in the US."

     Hoover's lists a sample report about Exxon at http://www.hoovers.com/content/dam/english/dnb-solutions/general-company-research/69-exxon-hooversreport.pdf that discusses Exxon's "Company Description" and "Company History" in detail. Similar coverage Material Sciences Corporation in Hoover's industry report about it would provide significant coverage of the Material Sciences Corporation.

  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Material Sciences Corporation to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 09:59, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm quite torn on this one, but are you volunteering to fix the article and add something beyond numbers and timelines of announcements? Your rebuttal to the proposal to delete this is at least one order of magnitude longer than the article. FalconK (talk) 01:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  You already found several of these on the last AFD and I am unconvinced of WP:CORPDEPTH. I suppose it depends if the Nelson Forbes pieces are significant. IgelRM (talk) 16:33, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of McDonnell Douglas MD-80 operators (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Article had only two citations, both of which were unreliable sources per WP:PLANESPOTTERS. Only reason I didn't remove the second citation was because I didn't spot it. So in essence, this list article, which contains details such as numbers of aircraft in operation or formerly in operation, is completely unsourced, with the only assistance for the reader being to go to the linked articles - which doesn't count as sourcing per WP:CIRCULAR Danners430 (talk) 11:23, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and Lists. Danners430 (talk) 11:23, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Well, you also have Airfleets [26], and at least SimpleFlying and BusinessInsider blog posts showing which airlines operate the plane: [27] [28] So it's not really a trivial/NLIST failing topic if we can agree on a proper source. There may be more in my old books in storage as well. SportingFlyer T·C 11:54, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Airfleets has been in multiple RSNs over the years where it's also been listed as unreliable, as it's basically the same as Planespotters. Simple Flying is a deprecated source, but Business Insider would work. If we can find sources, then obviously there's no problem keeping the article... unfortunately, often it takes an AfD for such action to take place!

  And for the record, yes I did make a quick search for sources myself... but as I'm not really an aviation-inclined person, I couldn't find anything substantial. Danners430 (talk) 11:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  There are at least three books directly on the planes published at various times, but I can't access their insides. SportingFlyer T·C 12:00, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I think if we're wanting to source current lists of operators and numbers though we probably need more recent sources Danners430 (talk) 12:01, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Very few operators still fly this plane. SportingFlyer T·C 17:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Simple Flying is NOT a reliable source WP:SIMPLEFLYING Protoeus (talk) 23:35, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - needing improvement (i.e. reliable references) is never a reason to delete an article. Fully referencing the list is something that should be achievable. Mjroots (talk) 09:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Sometimes opening an AfD is the only way to get an article improved... Like I said above, I've done a search for sources, but haven't been able to find anything substantial. Danners430 (talk) 09:38, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Investopia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

There is nothing to indicate that the subject is notable. This is a UAE government program created in 2021. There is no independent reliable news coverage of this program. The coverage is solely by news outlets that are propaganda outlets for the UAE government or are prohibited from reporting in any critical or nuanced way on this government program. Thenightaway (talk) 15:35, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United Arab Emirates. Shellwood (talk) 15:41, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep and improve - Based on global reach and influence as well as participation by notable individuals. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 17:52, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• • What about this program that has existed since 2021 indicates that it has "global reach" and "influence"? There is certainly nothing in this article, which is written like an advertisement, that suggests any such thing. If it's so influential and has such global reach, where is the RS coverage on this organization? Paying notable people to give a speech at a conference does not make the conference notable. Thenightaway (talk) 19:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doubtnut (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:38, 19 June 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) 12:38, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I don't have a strong opinion either way, but I think the Forbes article provides WP:SIGCOV, and probably also Business Standard India but that's behind a paywall. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 13:36, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Haryana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:47, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. A single profile in Forbes is not enough to establish notability. The platform is mentioned in scholarly articles only in statistical comparisons with similar platforms. Virtually everything out there about this is routine announcements, besides the one profile. See WP:SERIESA. FalconK (talk) 02:00, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify-most citations already noted seems to be passing mentions, but the company seems to have potential in terms of coverage, but so far in my searches lacks SIGCOV, suggest to draftify as an ATD to improve article.Lorraine Crane (talk) 18:19, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:21, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oswald Labs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:32, 19 June 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) 12:32, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Disability, Technology, and Netherlands. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep There are a great number of articles published in respectable and trustworthy sources to assert the subject's notability. WP:NCORP is a meeting. LKBT (talk) 10:25, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete There are number of articles published but that doesn't justify the notability of the article. This company page is totally written in a promotional manner and doesn't have anything which is notable worthy like awards.Almandavi (talk) 09:07, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Agent 007 (talk) 17:40, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Concurrence with Nom and User: Almandavi in toto, besides which, there does not seem to be particular significance to the company in general. One of their headline products, Agastya seems to lack any major adopters, and the publicly facing version on WordPress was last updated in 2019. Augmenta11y is gone from the Google Play Store, and is listed under a different name and different publisher in the Apple App Store. Valmiki, their web browser extension has been taken down from the Google Chrome Web store. SherivanOS is a concept that doesn't even have an alpha test out, and is, in all likelihood a violation of WP:CRYSTALBALL in as many words. As far as I can tell, Oswald Labs has no products which are notable or commercially viable. Foxtrot620 (talk) 02:46, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fluentgrid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. Furthermore, the WP:BEFORE check has failed and not a PUBLIC/WP:LISTED company, as it claims on the page. Current page is just a WP:SPAM, full of company products and services links WP:NOTADVERT. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 15:53, 18 June 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) 15:53, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep. The article doesn't seem to have any problems. According to WP:SIRS, it is notable. Earth605 (talk) 16:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Software and Andhra Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:33, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, but clean up. The company has potentially hundreds of instances of coverage in reliable sources. This article does it no justice. FalconK (talk) 02:58, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I am intrigued to hear why you think so? I didn't pull up anything good when I did my quick look so I am curious about your rationale. Moritoriko (talk) 04:01, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Specific source analysis would be helpful
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 12:27, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cybage (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. As of now, the page is a WP:PROMO TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 14:57, 18 June 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) 14:57, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Maharashtra. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:57, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. If kept, the only topic in here would be the controversy its office construction project appeared to cause, which is very WP:MILL. As it stands, this page is a promo created by an SPA. FalconK (talk) 03:07, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:14, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sonat-Verlag (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Cannot find any significant coverage on them. Darkm777 (talk) 21:38, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Business. Darkm777 (talk) 21:38, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 21:58, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Destinyokhiria 💬 20:37, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UniCredit Bank Slovakia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

A relatively minor bank that was only present on the Slovak market as an independent bank for six years before being merged with the Czech UniCredit. Newklear007 (talk) 11:25, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Newklear007 (talk) 11:25, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect, It is a minor now defunct bank and from what I can tell the significant information regarding its mergers is already in the UniCredit Bank Czech Republic and Slovakia. Because of this the article UniCredit Bank Slovakia itself doesn't hold much value, although the page view statistics do indicate that people view the page, so perhaps a redirect to UniCredit Bank Czech Republic and Slovakia is more appropriate so people at least find the relevant information. Emily.Owl ( she/her • talk) 11:45, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's important. Jdn2004 (talk) 11:54, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Slovakia. Shellwood (talk) 12:58, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:09, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep disagree with the rationale. Although the bank in that name only existed for six years it was established by mergers of other banks and can be traced back to 1993. 172,000 clients is significant in a country with a population of 5.4M, and being the fourth-largest bank in the country you would expect sources. There are numerous online sources going beyond trivial mentions locatable with a five-minute search, including [29], [30], and [31], as well as plenty on Google books on search terms for former banks which are part of this one's history, such as "Poľnobanka and "UniBanka", as well as "HVB Bank Slovakia". Article should be improved, not deleted. C679 10:18, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 14:17, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fortude (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This company doesn't seem to warrant a standalone article per WP:NCORP; sources I could find seem to fail WP:ORGCRIT (I'll add a breakdown below).

I think the article should be deleted or redirected to Brandix. But the (declared paid) article creator reverted an earlier change to a redirect, and reverted my recent attempt at a move to draftspace, so I'm coming here to reach a consensus.

Some additional context: The paid creator originally started the article as a draft in AFC. Once it was rejected twice at AFC,[32] they copy and pasted the article directly into mainspace,[33] and then possibly blanked the original rejected draft.[34] I attempted to explain that they should go through AFC on their talkpage when I moved it to draftspace, but they simply reverted the move with no explanation, and then expanded the article with more press releases. - Whisperjanes (talk) 03:18, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Technology, Asia, and Sri Lanka. Whisperjanes (talk) 03:18, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Nominator comment: Below are my breakdown of the sources currently in the article (excluding sources from Fortude or Brandix). Outside of these sources, the ones I could find (even using the company's previous name) mainly seemed to be press releases or routine coverage.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:18, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. More or less agree with nom, also if the page creator remains uncommunicative they should probably be blocked until they learn how to talk to people (preferably without using AI like they're doing for content and, more obviously, their user page). Alpha3031 (t • c) 06:14, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Broken Spoke Records (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This is an unusual one. This was a page for two record labels. I was going to nominate it after the founder of one of them was deleted. Then, Cielquiparle added references and removed the one I was going to nominate. The problem is that none of them meeet WP:NCORP. Broken Spoke Records probably only had 10 releases in total. The added references are about a performer and only mention the label. Geschichte (talk) 20:21, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Texas. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:04, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• keep This article is about a 1980s-90s publisher in the United States. There are cited two sources which are about artists whom this publisher featured, and those articles each describe the publisher in a few sentences. For pre-internet sourcing on paper newspapers, I have lower expectations for what constitutes GNG, and I feel this passes. Also, I have lower expectations for how much content we need for Wikipedia articles on publishers, because I favor the editorial practice of being more inclusive of Wikipedia content on publishers based on the essay Wikipedia:Notability (media). I recognize that this article could only ever be a few sentences, but describing publishers is a specialty that I think works well for Wikipedia. Bluerasberry (talk) 16:22, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Wikipedia doesn't have such a "specialty". This label was nowhere near influential. Geschichte (talk) 06:30, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete doesn't have enough reliable sources. I might have agreed to keep if the label had notable releases with reviews, but it doesn't appear so.Darkm777 (talk) 00:46, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:45, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Huayi Publishing House (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Reads like a press release and it may be better to WP:STARTOVER. Amigao (talk) 01:15, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:19, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:20, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:20, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
  1. Lei, Ben 雷奔 (2001). "书业 "黑马" 细说生意经——华艺出版社的陋巷传奇" [Publishing Industry 'Dark Horse' Shares Business Secrets — The Alleyway Legend of Huayi Publishing House]. 文化月刊 [Cultural Monthly] (in Chinese).

     This is a citation from Google Scholar.

  2. "华艺出版社：我们是怎样包装崔永元(1)" [Huayi Publishing: How We Packaged Cui Yongyuan (Part 1)]. china.com [zh] (in Chinese). 2001-07-30. Archived from the original on 2007-02-03. Retrieved 2025-06-15.

     The article notes: "华艺出版社因成功包装名人图书而在出版界享有盛誉。虽然，金丽红认为，华艺出版的大多数书并不是名人书；但事实上，华艺成功推出了不少名人书，如吴小莉的《足音》、敬一丹的《声音》、白岩松的《痛并快乐着》等，还有姜文、徐静蕾、高峰等人的书，而且，这些图书几乎是推出一本畅销一本。另外，著名作家如刘心武、王朔、王蒙、刘震云等人的重要著作，差不多也都是华艺率先推出的。" From Google Translate: "Huayi Publishing House enjoys a good reputation in the publishing industry for its successful packaging of celebrity books. Although Jin Lihong believes that most of the books published by Huayi are not celebrity books; in fact, Huayi has successfully launched many celebrity books, such as Wu Xiaoli's Footworks, Jing Yidan's Voice, Bai Yansong's Pain and Happiness, etc., as well as books by Jiang Wen, Xu Jinglei, Gao Feng and others, and these pictures The book is almost a best-selling book. In addition, the important works of famous writers such as Liu Xinwu, Wang Shuo, Wang Meng, Liu Zhenyun and others are almost all pioneered by Huayi."

  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Huayi Publishing House (simplified Chinese: 华艺出版社; traditional Chinese: 華藝出版社) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 11:23, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• The policies say that articles containing flaws should not be deleted if they can be improved. Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion says, If editing can address all relevant reasons for deletion, this should be done rather than deleting the page. Wikipedia:Editing policy#Wikipedia is a work in progress: perfection is not required says, Perfection is not required: Wikipedia is a work in progress. Collaborative editing means that incomplete or poorly written first drafts can evolve over time into excellent articles. Even poor articles, if they can be improved, are welcome. Cunard (talk) 11:23, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lawley Pharmaceuticals (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

promo of nn pharma. No independent coverage. I started cutting the fluff off, then noticed that someone else last week cut it in half already, and concluded that a more drastic handling is due. --Altenmann >talk 20:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC) ([reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 21:00, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:04, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep Aside from the promotional information that I have already eliminated, I find the topic to be significant. I believe it satisfies the criteria of WP:GNG. CresiaBilli (talk) 06:34, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do not see non-primary sources with significant coverage to satisfy GNG. --Altenmann >talk 07:06, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:VAGUEWAVE, WP:SOURCESEXIST. You have not identified any actual coverage. One of many throw away boilerplate !votes from this individual. duffbeerforme (talk) 00:01, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not add comments (WP:VAGUEWAVE) at afd without any analysis.. As I mentioned in my vote for "Weak Keep," there are not a lot of resources available on the web. On the other hand, I have made an effort to locate references that might offer more waitage in order to satisfy Notability Standards.. [35], [36], [37], [38], and [39]. CresiaBilli (talk) 05:54, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Press release, Comment from company, comment from company, passing mention, passing mention. Nothing helpful there. duffbeerforme (talk) 23:36, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:22, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete - most of the sources are primary. Bearian (talk) 10:16, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:49, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wraith Games (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Coverage and sources used consists of simple mentions or obscure websites of dubious reliability, with reliable significant coverage being in the minority. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:47, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Ohio. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:47, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It is my belief that the main problem with the article is that it is old. There appear to be newer sources of higher notability and reliability stating not only much of the same information as in the article currently, but there is new information as well. It is likely that only some information will need to be removed, if at all. Sirkidd2003 (talk) 16:15, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The Journal-News article is SIGCOV, but there isn't much else to go on. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:58, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  It's also a local article, concurring Delete. IgelRM (talk) 21:24, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP I have gone through and restructured the article, removing what I view as outdated information and sources of low notability. I have also gone in and added new info to strengthen the worth of the article and added stronger sources wherever applicable. I've got a bunch of sources compiled, and I feel that, even if this updated version isn't enough yet (though I hope it is), there are enough good sources and noteworthy information to make an article on this topic work. Sirkidd2003 (talk) 12:53, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep voters should mention specific sources that they feel establish notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 09:00, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be very pedantic; there was one keep voter, who commented twice. IgelRM (talk) 14:47, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These are what I've found so far:

https://www.journal-news.com/lifestyles/a-hamilton-business-turning-20-wants-to-un-junk-the-block-and-help-clean-the-downtown-area/YW64DJ2HTRDHBMXL34ZFH747BM/

https://www.journal-news.com/business/local-gaming-company-racking-awards-working-help-more-play/k7aDPaX8zltjyyT9nDQfVN/

https://www.journal-news.com/news/local/hamilton-start-video-game-readies-for-wide-release/LrrplhJLGO6DV02lgI6EnO/

https://www.journal-news.com/news/local/local-startup-releasing-first-major-video-game/ls0axLXXqWJNP8C8AKQwiN/

https://www.journal-news.com/news/hamilton-start-game-for-national-award/5w7bdEKW1hAlrOoLqkRpyI/

https://www.wvxu.org/technology/2017-01-05/how-video-games-are-developed-and-the-challenges-of-a-multi-platform-world

https://www.wvxu.org/technology/2017-02-07/the-latest-advancements-in-technology-designed-to-improve-lives-of-those-facing-physical-challenges

TV Hamilton: https://youtu.be/kxOcswEn00s?si=4Zh7vNHVTXdxcLSH

https://www.fox19.com/clip/13013524/wraith-games-with-jay-kidd/

https://www.foxnews.com/tech/developers-push-to-make-gaming-more-inclusive-for-players-with-disabilities

https://americanart.si.edu/blog/saam-arcade-2019-representation-matters

https://www.si.edu/newsdesk/releases/smithsonian-american-art-museums-annual-video-game-festival-saam-arcade-builds

https://wtop.com/dc/2019/08/saam-arcade-celebrates-art-of-video-games-shines-light-on-underrepresented-communities/

https://www.theesa.com/saam-arcade-2019-breaking-barriers/

https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2018/04/become_a_puzzle_master_in_collapsus_coming_to_switch_later_this_year

https://bleedingcool.com/games/collapsus-broke-our-puzzle-brain-during-pax-east-2019/

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/mobile-games-hotspot-marvel-debuts-rpg-phones-pokemon-go-launching-new-competitive-mode-1282640/

https://www.thegamer.com/collapsus-tetris-candy-crush-with-a-twist/

https://caniplaythat.com/2020/01/09/2019-accessibility-award-winners/

There are likely others. If the changes I've made aren't enough, I'm sure a good article can be made with the sources above. Sirkidd2003 (talk) 00:05, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sources specifically about the company are local stories, which generally aren't sufficient for notability. IgelRM (talk) 01:23, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Truemeds (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP. References are routine announcements, mentions, funding rounds, WP:NEWSORGINDIA, or otherwise unreliable. Nothing I can find meets WP:ORGCRIT. History shows this was moved to draft but then moved back to mainspace. CNMall41 (talk) 06:15, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Medicine, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 06:15, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Websites and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:24, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I will suggest to draftify the article, there is no doubt that Truemeds is notable but article read like a PROMO. Chronos.Zx (talk) 01:18, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not notable actually. Moving to draft was originally done as an WP:ATD but that was objected to which is why were are here. Moving it back to draft without a keep or delete decision will just allow it to be moved right back to mainspace and bring us immediately back to a discussion. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:29, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I can see there are significant coverage to meet its notability criteria of a company. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:18, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:VAGUEWAVE, WP:SOURCESEXIST. You have not identified any actual coverage. One of many throw away boilerplate !votes from this individual. duffbeerforme (talk) 00:04, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not add comments (WP:VAGUEWAVE) at afd without any analysis. The resources which i find significant: [40], [41], [42], [43]. CresiaBilli (talk) 05:42, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NEWSORGINDIA, routine funding round announcement, routine partnership announcement, interview with company. Nothing useful there. duffbeerforme (talk) 23:41, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Presenting sources that support claims of notability would be most helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:59, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: PROMO. No RS and even in Gscholar, it's all primary links that are too PROMO as well to be helpful. I don't see any sourcing we can use. Oaktree b (talk) 14:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Oaktree; poor article which doesn't actually elaborate on the business itself, just whatever funding it's getting. Nathannah • 📮 16:15, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DXET-TV (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Same rationale as the 2024 deletion nomination. There is no significant coverage in reliable sources to show notability. CNMall41 (talk) 07:22, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Companies, and Philippines. CNMall41 (talk) 07:22, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are enough sources in its history, also, none of the sources are from TV5's websites. RandomMe98 (talk) 09:05, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see press releases and churnalism. Are there any that talk about it in-depth? --CNMall41 (talk) 15:57, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't found any in-depth information about recent developments, most of my searches for TV5 Davao even on Rappler are scarce, it doesn't help that Philippine TV is one of my weakest points, the community is heavily reliant on misinformation and also false claims that the station existed before Martial Law, I replaced one of the sources with one from Rappler which covered the same as the previous source, but the problem with the Big 3 networks is the amount of churnalism and shownalism that I find, which is excessive RandomMe98 (talk) 22:20, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I took a look at the Rapper source and it mentions the parent network (TV5), but not this individual channel. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:39, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, unfortunately I think I should quit this article, because there is little to no information. Also it doesn't help that local programming is minimal since its beginnings RandomMe98 (talk) 22:46, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have access (e.g., know a language other than English) to any non-English sourcing by chance? --CNMall41 (talk) 22:53, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jdcooper, @Ohnoitsjamie, @CNMall41, @Bbb23, @RandomMe98, @Khairul hazim, @ViperSnake151.... Isn't it also a notable and reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic regarding the Philippine TV like this....???!!!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gxcPVBBrJ74 202.67.47.23 (talk) 04:08, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are scarce, and information is heavily conflictive. Moreover, the callsigns are not used in the Philippine newspaper sources I find RandomMe98 (talk) 09:14, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sammi Brie 223.255.224.100 (talk) 22:48, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@WayKurat 223.255.224.100 (talk) 23:02, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Myrabert01, @Vineyard93 223.255.224.100 (talk) 23:07, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dani1603, @Pratama26 223.255.224.100 (talk) 23:08, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JacobSanchez295, @Señor verde 223.255.224.100 (talk) 23:11, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 19:46, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly Delete and/or Redirect and Merge into TV5 Network. Trishie042512 (talk) 12:58, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already at AFD so not eligible for Soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:22, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• What a mess. (For the record, the ping did not work, so I am only seeing this now.) The problem right now is there is not nearly enough sourcing to sustain this article. This is a source availability problem in large part, as is typical in the Philippines. If a Davao publication were available for the years covered in station history and covered it reasonably well, there could be an article here. But that is not the case. Redirect to TV5 Network. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 02:09, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of television and radio stations owned by TV5 Network (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST as sources do not talk about the stations as a whole. Most of the stations do not have Wikipedia pages and some that do should be sent to AfD as well (including some that have no sources at all). CNMall41 (talk) 07:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Television, Companies, Lists, and Philippines. CNMall41 (talk) 07:20, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom + WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Possibly Merge summary/overview (not yet written) into TV5 Network Inc. Jdcooper (talk) 22:57, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The TV5 Network Inc. does not provide any listing TV stations on their annual reports. Only on the NTC TV stations as of December 2024. Vineyard93 (talk) 02:23, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Does the NTC list count as reliable? RandomMe98 (talk) 09:34, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The National Telecommunications Commission is the authority in the Philippines when it comes to TV and radio stations (among other things). Now, if their publications qualify for WP:RS that depends... Howard the Duck (talk) 21:51, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Wikipedia requires reliable sources. IP range blocked for tiresome pinging. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:20, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Ohnoitsjamie: it's the same compulsive over-tagger we were discussing recently. Jdcooper (talk) 14:19, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• What is tough about this list is that we have to deal with infrequent NTC list updates exfiltrated through Freedom of Information Act requests. They can confirm existence at least. And then we have many many stations where there is insufficient material to pass GNG because of poor source availability, even sometimes when a station has been on for decades. This is a useful redirect target at AfD, and while I understand if people have qualms over sourcing, this page resolves lots of thorny problems. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 02:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Additional thoughts on merging or redirecting?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:09, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Delete, Redirect and Merger into TV5 Network. Trishie042512 (talk) 01:11, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TV5 (formerly ABC-5) is the only major television network and the sole free-to-air television network in the Philippines that are possibly Delete and/or Redirect, and Merge summary/overview into TV5 Network as most of the stations does not have Wikipedia pages and even the sources do not talk the TV stations as a whole that WP:NLIST fails, per CNMall41. Since 2016, resulting in all stations have a full-power relay/translator of DWET after 3 decades of duplicative. Only on the National Telecommunications Commission TV stations and frequencies as of December 2024. Trishie042512 (talk) 06:49, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like to hear more thoughts on Sammi's WP:IAR argument, This is a useful redirect target at AfD, and while I understand if people have qualms over sourcing, this page resolves lots of thorny problems., and if there is any reasonable place for a redirect/merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 16:56, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FuelTech (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I couldn't find real WP:SIGCOV for this, excluding press releases, copies of press releases on industry websites, and one promotional interview. BuySomeApples (talk) 03:51, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Engineering, Technology, and Brazil. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:58, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Per WP:TNT. "After dominating..." "pioneered..." The rest reads like a company brochure. Moving to draft could be an WP:ATD but I cannot find anything meeting WP:CORPDEPTH so not sure if it can be fixed. Would also suggest a merge with Anderson Dick but that looks like a mess and possibly not notable either. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:16, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – Per [44], [45], [46]. The company is well-known in the automotive preparation sector. Svartner (talk) 16:31, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 05:32, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:16, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Svartner - big in racing and gets coverage for its technology. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 03:56, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The issue with the three references presented by Svartner is that they all fail WP:CORPDEPTH.--CNMall41 (talk) 08:01, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Desta Global (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

If one checks Google News and other news, the company cannot be named notable. Just random here and there blogs, mentions, wp:churnalism, newswire releases, WOW award, RMAI Flame award. The previous discussion was not representative and resulted in no consensus. Many of the sources have been already removed as spam. NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 10:00, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:09, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Technology, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – Of the references for DestaGlobal, Startup Success Stories India, Techcircle, Business Standard India, The Hindu Business Line (partially neutral), InterCon Dubai (YouTube), EVENTFAQS Media, Rural Marketing, and Digital Empowerment Foundation are focused on DestaGlobal’s success, awards, and positive impact. Most of these are based on the company’s claims without independent verification. The National and The Hindu are references that adhere to journalistic standards, providing neutral information about DestaGlobal’s work, but they lack detailed information. Hence, they are not sufficient to strongly support the claims. Some people may have different opinions about these two sources.-SachinSwami (talk) 7:01, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:12, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Additional input regarding available source material would be very helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:07, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]