The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
I cannot find coverage that demonstrates that
WP:CORP is met. Note that I have
removed various sources noting awards but all of them where from the same organisation giving the award i.e. not independent coverage.
SmartSE (
talk)
16:44, 15 November 2023 (UTC)reply
The information that is left in the article seems to be found on their company website, which makes sense for that kind of basic information.
Regarding coverage to demonstrate
WP:CORP I found several independent articles that mention Avature as an HR tech company (see references below). Avature is a well-established company and their article page goes back to 2012. Based on the above and the
WP:ORGCRIT provided, we should keep this page.
Delete - Article fails
WP:NORG. To the points above, being "well-established" isn't what shows notability on Wikipedia. As for the sources: (1) is a niche WordPress blog that, when taking
WP:AUD into consideration, isn't sufficient for notability whether this person's blog is reliable or not. (2) is a press release, and so is not independent and does not contribute to notability. (3) is also a press release but
notability is not inherited, so if the article showed notability for the individual, that notability does not transfer to any and every company they work for. However, even if it's wasn't a press release, such lists
are specifically listed as an example of trivial coverage. (4) is the same niche WordPress blog as 1. (5) is indeed trivial coverage. I wasn't able to find anything online that would show notability either. -
Aoidh (
talk)
00:34, 18 November 2023 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
I cannot find coverage that demonstrates that
WP:CORP is met. Note that I have
removed various sources noting awards but all of them where from the same organisation giving the award i.e. not independent coverage.
SmartSE (
talk)
16:44, 15 November 2023 (UTC)reply
The information that is left in the article seems to be found on their company website, which makes sense for that kind of basic information.
Regarding coverage to demonstrate
WP:CORP I found several independent articles that mention Avature as an HR tech company (see references below). Avature is a well-established company and their article page goes back to 2012. Based on the above and the
WP:ORGCRIT provided, we should keep this page.
Delete - Article fails
WP:NORG. To the points above, being "well-established" isn't what shows notability on Wikipedia. As for the sources: (1) is a niche WordPress blog that, when taking
WP:AUD into consideration, isn't sufficient for notability whether this person's blog is reliable or not. (2) is a press release, and so is not independent and does not contribute to notability. (3) is also a press release but
notability is not inherited, so if the article showed notability for the individual, that notability does not transfer to any and every company they work for. However, even if it's wasn't a press release, such lists
are specifically listed as an example of trivial coverage. (4) is the same niche WordPress blog as 1. (5) is indeed trivial coverage. I wasn't able to find anything online that would show notability either. -
Aoidh (
talk)
00:34, 18 November 2023 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.