Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Branch Metrics

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. – Joe (talk) 16:17, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Branch Metrics

[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 listing for an unremarkable private company. Significant RS coverage not found. What comes up is routine notices, passing mentions and / or WP:SPIP. Created by Special:Contributions/Lidarosehasbrouck with few other contributions outside this topic. Does not meet new and improved WP:NCORP. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:05, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 05:48, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 05:48, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 05:48, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 05:48, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yunshui ^雲 _水 06:59, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:19, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Almost entirely non-reliable sources. The few suitable sources only have a few lines (once discounting press release summaries etc). There is the usual bickering over whether tech crunch might count as a source, but in any case it wouldn't meet the WP:NCORP standards as multiple intellectually independent sources would be required. Nosebagbear (talk)

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.