Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SOTI Inc. (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. —SpacemanSpiff 07:08, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

SOTI Inc.[edit]

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

I do not think that the references here show notability. It just escapes speedy A7, and although I deleted a previous version as G11, I think this needs a discussion. See the refs suggested at AfD1. DGG ( talk ) 00:59, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:15, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:16, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:16, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment An article by James Heary describes this firm as having over 10,000 software users "including a healthy dose of fortune 500 companies" [1] It is a blog posting, so I haven't added it into the article, though it may pass as a bylined piece by a recognised journalist. AllyD (talk) 06:29, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete—They've got a very good PR person: mentions in CMSWire press release, Intermec, Cult of Mac, E-week, and Brighthand, but these are effectively press releases. Also an interview in Network World. To put this in perspective, ZDnet wrote an actual article listing their top-10 MDM solutions and SOTI didn't make the cut (although their PR person is earning their money in the article comments). In short, despite the pile of links there's very little out here that doesn't originate with the company. Given a handful of independent citations and I think this article gets over the line, but with what I have in front of me this doesn't (in my opinion) meet WP:CORPDEPTH. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 07:45, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt. IMO trade-magazine articles are not enough. See the exclusion of "media of limited interest and circulation" in WP:CORPDEPTH. Let's leave SOTI out of Wikipedia until we see significant coverage in major mainstream sources such as The New York Times and the print version of BusinessWeek. Salting would be wise since the article has been repeatedly recreated. If the creator wants to create it again, they should first reread WP:42, then they should present their sources to the AfD-closing administrator. Cheers, —Unforgettableid (talk) 21:01, 11 September 2013 (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.