Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CloudMade

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. czar 21:33, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CloudMade[edit]

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

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. " It was deprodded by User:Galinabesedina (WP:SPA) with no rationale; subsequently most of their additions were deleted as copyvio. This is an ad for a company that fails notability; sources are mentions-in-passing, and primary sources such as press releases or business as usual press-release reprints reporting 'acquired X, hired Z'. As I discussed in my Signpost Op-Ed, this is a good example of Yellow-Pages like company spam. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:32, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 10:48, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 10:48, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 10:48, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 10:48, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 10:48, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:31, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as corporate spam, with content such as "...with products including a machine learning platform,[1][2] a content aggregation platform,[3][4][5] a connected car analytics solution[6] and a map data crowdsourcing toolset[7]" (talk about ref spam). Tech startups are rarely notable and this one does not meet the mark, per available sources. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:58, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete notability is a stretch, and even if one admits notability, the article itself is blatant promotion. Clearly anything calling itself a "solution" that is not a solution is a product of marketing. W Nowicki (talk) 23:11, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Blatant promotions, corporate spam and no significance.Light2021 (talk) 19:23, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and GNG. Blatent corporate spam. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 15:16, 26 June 2017 (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.