Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Verisart

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. ✗plicit 23:29, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Verisart[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)

Not seeing notability, using Forbes contributor pieces, PR pieces and funding announcements. Appears PROMO. And everything crypto isn't notable. Oaktree b (talk) 20:17, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Oaktree b (talk) 20:17, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and California. Shellwood (talk) 20:18, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I just cleaned up all the crypto blogs. What remains is a farrago of art blogs and press release reprints. The one RS is Bloomberg. Fails WP:NCORP, as well as appearing to be just spam - David Gerard (talk) 12:14, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. The page has been edited several times since the first day. Does the page still appear spammy to you? I think the first attempt was spammy with all those partnerships I included, so I deleted them. I thought it was good to have them, but at least I know what to avoid in the future. Thanks.Bmjc98 (talk) 14:50, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The page has been updated several times since it was created. Some questionable sources were removed and replaced with something new by another editor. Please, have a look at the page before deciding to remove it. Thank you. Bmjc98 (talk) 20:53, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:40, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete If you remove the usual company announcements (funding), the press releases, the niche publications, and the minor mentions, only one source is left, Bloomberg. Lamona (talk) 03:04, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Agree with arguments already made. The coverage cited is routine in nature. NCORP provides a high standard for companies, and I do not think the available coverage in or out of the article meets the criteria. It is of insufficient depth to warrant inclusion. While the improvements made by Bmjc98 are appreciated, no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. Even the coverage in sources that look promising such as Bloomberg contain only a trivial mention of the subject. Such trivial coverage is not significant. MaxnaCarta (talk) 05:01, 4 May 2023 (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.