- 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:29, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Shape Security
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Shape Security ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
An advertorially-toned page on an unremarkable private company. Significant RS coverage not found; what comes up is passing mentions and / or WP:SPIP, such as self-promotional reports by the company. Does not meet WP:NCORP / WP:CORPDEPTH. K.e.coffman ( talk) 06:33, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:48, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:49, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:49, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear ( talk) 20:19, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear ( talk) 20:19, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Search finds routine coverage and promotion, not WP:SIGCOV, so fails WP:CORPDEPTH as nominator indicates. Additionally, article provides little information that is non-promotional, and engages in WP:OVERCITE to link to promotional sources. Bakazaka ( talk) 21:11, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Agree with above, references fail the criteria for establishing notability, fails WP:NCORP. HighKing ++ 12:53, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- 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.
The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:29, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Shape Security
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Shape Security ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
An advertorially-toned page on an unremarkable private company. Significant RS coverage not found; what comes up is passing mentions and / or WP:SPIP, such as self-promotional reports by the company. Does not meet WP:NCORP / WP:CORPDEPTH. K.e.coffman ( talk) 06:33, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:48, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:49, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:49, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear ( talk) 20:19, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear ( talk) 20:19, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Search finds routine coverage and promotion, not WP:SIGCOV, so fails WP:CORPDEPTH as nominator indicates. Additionally, article provides little information that is non-promotional, and engages in WP:OVERCITE to link to promotional sources. Bakazaka ( talk) 21:11, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Agree with above, references fail the criteria for establishing notability, fails WP:NCORP. HighKing ++ 12:53, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- 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.