The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. -- Patar knight - ^chat/ _{contributions} 03:33, 12 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Piwik PRO (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Non-notable company. References consist of advertorials, routine announcements, and coverage in affiliated publications. None of these refs meet all criteria in WP:ORGCRIT. GermanJoe ( talk) 11:15, 4 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. GermanJoe ( talk) 11:18, 4 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. GermanJoe ( talk) 11:18, 4 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. GermanJoe ( talk) 11:18, 4 September 2018 (UTC) reply

• Comment - the article creator transparently disclosed a conflict of interest on their user page (thank you), but drafts from connected contributors should be reviewed through the WP:AFC process before publication. The current sourcing is still far from sufficient. GermanJoe ( talk) 11:25, 4 September 2018 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Sources limited to press releases and rewritten press releases, mostly reporting business as usual (new company secures funding, etc.). WP:NOTYELLOWPAGES spam. -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:27, 4 September 2018 (UTC) reply
• Comment - Could you please explain and elaborate on what do you mean by the conflict of interest here? Thanks! -- Szymongrzesiak ( talk) 11:51, 4 September 2018 (UTC) reply
  • A possible conflict of interest is not limited to the main topic Clearcode, but usually extends to all closely connected topics such as subsidiaries (and products, competitors, partners, etc.). If you need additional advice, please feel free to ask at WP:Teahouse which would be a better forum for detailed information. But the conflict of interest is not the main problem here anyway (COI-editors can create drafts for volunteer review), the lack of good independent sources with in-depth coverage is. GermanJoe ( talk) 12:28, 4 September 2018 (UTC) reply
• Delete per Piotrus, only routine coverage exists - no independant analysis Galobtter ( pingó mió) 15:44, 5 September 2018 (UTC) reply
• Delete - Ignoring the COI for a minute, I can tell you that I would not have approved this through AfC even if the creator had submitted it there. I cannot see any coverage out there that would add up to WP:CORPDEPTH. What is available is brief mentions, general announcements, and press releases. It may be notable in the future, but not at this time. I should note that I also checked for references associated with Clearcode and found nothing that could be used there either. -- CNMall41 ( talk) 20:58, 5 September 2018 (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.