Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SoftwareONE

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 06:24, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SoftwareONE[edit]

[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)

No Notability 8ya (talk • contribs) 12:19, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:36, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:36, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. "end-to-end Software and Cloud Technology Solutions" Yummy! Also, if you're standing up your WP page on Businesswire, you're toast. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:17, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The whole article depends on the press releases. Does not satisfy WP:NCORP. GermanKity (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and To be improved The actual state of the article is really poor, but when looking to the original articles SoftwareONE (alsWP) rsp. SoftwareONE (deWP), the abvoe argument The whole article depends on the press releases can easily be refuted and used for upgrading. E.g. KKR involved, MS Partner of the Year, CRN: #14 of 500, sales US$ 7 bn. AVS (talk) 05:22, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Modified 'Conservation' to 'Keep' according the usual terminology. AVS (talk) 18:15, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- @Avernarius: Sorry if I am getting things wrong since this is my first time requesting a delete, but don't those fall under WP:INHERITORG and Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Examples_of_trivial_coverage? 8ya (talk • contribs) 13:51, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't think so. Of course, it's easy to delete - but our strive always should be, to improve instead negate. Need help with translation? AVS (talk) 04:42, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - I can read both the Alemannic and the German version, but I don't really see a reason for those to be Wikipedia articles either, as they don't offer much more on notability as far as I can see 8ya (talk • contribs) 17:38, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      - I made some changes now, though I think, it should be done by you, as initiant. AVS (talk) 09:03, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        Thank you, but I don't think any of these fulfill our criteria for notability, as they should fall under the points raised before 8ya (talk • contribs) 09:54, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Peter303x (talk) 00:47, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Avernarius:, may I ask which sources exactly you think fulfill our notability criteria? 8ya (talk • contribs) 09:45, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's annoying. Let's decide the community. AVS (talk) 13:27, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why would we decide the community? :) 8ya (talk • contribs) 01:37, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Linguistics replaces missing arguments :-( AVS (talk) 04:46, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not trying to argue here, I am simply asking why you think the way you do and get an "it's annoying" :-((( 8ya (talk • contribs) 08:05, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of again and again renewing your demamands, please study Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. It's you, who's in obligation to be active, as its YOU, who wants an action. Furthermore, some of the above arguments are simply false (The whole article depends on the press releases.). Just a few non-formal questions: What about KKR, sales of 9 bn US$ - did you try to verify? AVS (talk) 05:04, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Avernarius:, may I ask which sources exactly you think fulfill our notability criteria? 8ya (talk • contribs) 09:45, 19 June 2021 (UTC) 8ya (talk • contribs) 10:34, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

* Sure, simply read: a) the article, b) my above answers AVS (talk) 04:22, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

but don't those fall under WP:INHERITORG and Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Examples_of_trivial_coverage? 8ya (talk • contribs) 13:51, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@Avernarius:, may I ask which sources exactly you think fulfill our notability criteria? 8ya (talk • contribs) 09:45, 19 June 2021 (UTC) 8ya (talk • contribs) 10:34, 22 June 2021 (UTC) 8ya (talk • contribs) 12:31, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

* Tibetan prayer wheel ... AVS (talk) 04:46, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The applicable guideline is WP:NCORP. I am unable to locate any deep or significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content, references to date fail the criteria for establishing notability, topic therefore fails WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 15:39, 19 June 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.