Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AVO Automation

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 05:40, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AVO Automation[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)

Non notable organization that fails to satisfy WP:NCORP as they lack in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of them. A before search leads me to user generated sources, pr sponsored posts and mere announcements, invariably there is 0 WP:ORGDEPTH. Celestina007 (talk) 02:24, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 02:24, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 02:24, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 02:24, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 02:24, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 02:24, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: A lot of the references are PR type. I counted only two references which were reliable sources. Remainder were all promotion for the insurance industry, prevention of fraud, laudable though that is. Alack, not enough references to give notability. --Whiteguru (talk) 04:53, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. Fails WP:NCORP. Kolma8 (talk) 05:45, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, that's about as thin as sourcing can get. Best wait until (perhaps) the company actually becomes noteworthy. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:53, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - likely undisclosed paid-for spam. I've blocked the creator for this. MER-C 14:07, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom and above all. -Hatchens (talk) 17:16, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The company doesn't meet Wikipedia Notability Requirements --Rupertdonovan (talk) 23:58, 27 July 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.