Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Absolutdata

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:10, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutdata[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

A directory-like page on an unremarkable private company. Significant RS coverage not found. What comes up is passing mentions, routine notices, and / or WP:SPIP. Does not meet WP:NCORP / WP:CORPDEPTH. Created by Special:Contributions/Intelsohail with no other contributions outside this topic. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:37, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 06:50, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: An article created and developed by WP:SPAs, describing the company's wares supported by routine announcement references. Searches are not finding the reliable in-depth coverage needed to demonstrated this as more than a firm going about its business. Nor do the listed non-notable industry awards (emerging, top-10 in sector, etc.) meet the notability criteria. Fails WP:NCORP. AllyD (talk) 06:59, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - promotional article about a company with not enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to show it passes either WP:GNG or WP:CORPDEPTH. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:45, 3 August 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.