The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:45, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Semi-advertorialized article about a company, referenced almost entirely to
primary sources with little evidence of media coverage shown to get it over
WP:GNG or
WP:CORPDEPTH. Three of the five footnotes here are the company's own website about itself, one more is an entry in a business directory that isn't a notability builder, and I've also already stripped a citation to the company's own
LinkedIn page -- which means there's only one acceptable footnote here, an article in the Indiana Economic Digest, but that isn't enough all by itself.
The even bigger problem here is that this has been flagged for relying too much on primary sources since 2009, with the Indiana Economic Digest source being the only new source that's ever been added to the article in the entire 13 years since. I'm perfectly willing to withdraw this if somebody with much better access to archived American media coverage than I've got can find enough legitimate sourcing to get this over the bar -- but after 13 years it can't just keep sitting around in this badly-sourced state anymore, and it's time to pull the "fix it or lose it" trigger.
Bearcat (
talk)
21:55, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:45, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Semi-advertorialized article about a company, referenced almost entirely to
primary sources with little evidence of media coverage shown to get it over
WP:GNG or
WP:CORPDEPTH. Three of the five footnotes here are the company's own website about itself, one more is an entry in a business directory that isn't a notability builder, and I've also already stripped a citation to the company's own
LinkedIn page -- which means there's only one acceptable footnote here, an article in the Indiana Economic Digest, but that isn't enough all by itself.
The even bigger problem here is that this has been flagged for relying too much on primary sources since 2009, with the Indiana Economic Digest source being the only new source that's ever been added to the article in the entire 13 years since. I'm perfectly willing to withdraw this if somebody with much better access to archived American media coverage than I've got can find enough legitimate sourcing to get this over the bar -- but after 13 years it can't just keep sitting around in this badly-sourced state anymore, and it's time to pull the "fix it or lose it" trigger.
Bearcat (
talk)
21:55, 16 August 2022 (UTC)