The result was delete. MelanieN ( talk) 20:42, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Fails WP:NCORP. Brochure article. scope_creep Talk 12:42, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Keep I wrote the page. It seems to me that it meets the primary criteria in WP:NCORP: there is substantial coverage of the subject (whole articles about it, sources are cited in the page, e.g. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]) in multiple reliable sources completely independent of the subject and of each other, such as Zero Hora, Exame, O Globo and Endeavor_(non-profit) (see aforementioned links). The coverage spans at least 4 years (2019-2022). Seems enough? Saturnalia0 ( talk) 17:50, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
13:03, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Arbitrarily0 (
talk)
22:04, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
References
SailingInABathTub ( talk) 01:00, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Here you have an interview with the founders, several press-releases, company manuals and 3 non-rs links. The references above are no different. The whole things fails WP:NCORP. There is not single secondary source amongst the lot of it. Its all advertising and PR. scope_creep Talk 23:51, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
I believe the analysis above is partially flawed. **Ref 1** is for the number of employees only, how is the company itself not a reliable source for that? **Ref 2** for instance is not an interview with the founders during conferences, it's an long article about the company history, which *includes* an interview. This has already been pointed out in this discussion before, but ignored by the OP of this request. As for **Ref 3** I am not sure what the OP means by "press release" in this case (I do not understand the significance of the term in this context). The company received significant funding (billions) in a series from VCs and other funds and the ref is a specialized website covering it and also talking about the company history. This was not the only source to cover this event, OP failed to mention [7], a national magazine. This event received more coverage than is mentioned in the article, as it was not necessary as there were already reliable sources for it, but for completion here is more sources that covered this event found in a quick search: [8] [9] Ref 4 is indeed about the building, and used to reference that only... The rest of the analysis I would say is correct, it's press coverage spawning several years of various topics related to the company (starting operation in Europe, etc) from multiple reliable sources, including national newspapers and magazines (e.g. [10]). Some refs are indeed technical details used to reference some parts of the article. Saturnalia0 ( talk) 09:54, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
All of it is driven by press-releases and all of primary. scope_creep Talk 10:01, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. MelanieN ( talk) 20:42, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Fails WP:NCORP. Brochure article. scope_creep Talk 12:42, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Keep I wrote the page. It seems to me that it meets the primary criteria in WP:NCORP: there is substantial coverage of the subject (whole articles about it, sources are cited in the page, e.g. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]) in multiple reliable sources completely independent of the subject and of each other, such as Zero Hora, Exame, O Globo and Endeavor_(non-profit) (see aforementioned links). The coverage spans at least 4 years (2019-2022). Seems enough? Saturnalia0 ( talk) 17:50, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
13:03, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Arbitrarily0 (
talk)
22:04, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
References
SailingInABathTub ( talk) 01:00, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Here you have an interview with the founders, several press-releases, company manuals and 3 non-rs links. The references above are no different. The whole things fails WP:NCORP. There is not single secondary source amongst the lot of it. Its all advertising and PR. scope_creep Talk 23:51, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
I believe the analysis above is partially flawed. **Ref 1** is for the number of employees only, how is the company itself not a reliable source for that? **Ref 2** for instance is not an interview with the founders during conferences, it's an long article about the company history, which *includes* an interview. This has already been pointed out in this discussion before, but ignored by the OP of this request. As for **Ref 3** I am not sure what the OP means by "press release" in this case (I do not understand the significance of the term in this context). The company received significant funding (billions) in a series from VCs and other funds and the ref is a specialized website covering it and also talking about the company history. This was not the only source to cover this event, OP failed to mention [7], a national magazine. This event received more coverage than is mentioned in the article, as it was not necessary as there were already reliable sources for it, but for completion here is more sources that covered this event found in a quick search: [8] [9] Ref 4 is indeed about the building, and used to reference that only... The rest of the analysis I would say is correct, it's press coverage spawning several years of various topics related to the company (starting operation in Europe, etc) from multiple reliable sources, including national newspapers and magazines (e.g. [10]). Some refs are indeed technical details used to reference some parts of the article. Saturnalia0 ( talk) 09:54, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
All of it is driven by press-releases and all of primary. scope_creep Talk 10:01, 20 July 2022 (UTC)