Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mozenda

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 20:38, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mozenda

[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)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:COMPANY. The article is sourced by corporate profiles and press releases. I was unable to locate any descriptive details about this company in reliable secondary sources. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:40, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:40, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 17:43, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 17:43, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No reliable sources in article, no coverage in any major news sources, fails WP:GNG and clear violation of WP:NOTPROMO. Thurm64 ^talk _{my edits} 22:07, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - references are lists or in passing. Fails WP:NCORP. Bearian (talk) 16:59, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am unable to locate any significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content, fails GNG/WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 20:51, 1 February 2020 (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.