Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newgen Software (2nd nomination)

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 23:14, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Newgen Software

[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 & WP:CORP. Most of the coverage here doesn't seem independent. On search, only stocks related coverage is coming out. Had a lot of sources that were their own company pages and have removed them already. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:46, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:46, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:46, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:46, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note : This has been nominated in past and has been kept basis that sources exist. I failed to find them really. If they do exist, please add them in the article rather than stating here so that no other editor in future feels like putting this on nomination yet another time. Thanks! Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:52, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can't soft delete due to prior AfD's so relisting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 09:12, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of deep or significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. None of the references in the article meet the criteria, most are bog standard PR or articles based entirely on announcements. Having searched I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria. Topic fails WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 12:09, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for more discussion, in light of prior AfDs.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:39, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Okay, one more relist for the road.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:06, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Subject lacks significant independent coverage in reliable sources per nom. Meatsgains^(talk) 01:25, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- Subject lacks significant independent coverage. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. Sanketio31 (talk) 15:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as what above commenters said... does not meet WP:GNG. Webmaster862 (talk) 02:43, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NCORP Devoke water 08:01, 13 April 2021 (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.