Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intelestream

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. Of note is that press releases are not usable to establish topic notability. WP:GNG states, ""Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent". North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:51, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Intelestream[edit]

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

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. " It was deprodded by User:TonyTheTiger with the following rationale "given the Rueters ref, we should consider whether this passes WP:GNG". Well, Tony, let me teach you a spammer trick that they used to waste our time: Reuters and other big media companies REPUBLISH PR PIECES AND PRESS RELESESES on their sites. Big hint: see the "Reuters is not responsible for the content in this press release." on the top of that page? It means it is spam. Many of the Reuters refs I see here on Wikipedia are for this kind of spam, be ware of them in the future. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:19, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As far as I can tell, this article is based almost entirely on regurgitated press releases plus the company website, and I have been unable to find any significant, independent reporting of this company in reliable sources. Accordingly, the company is not yet notable and therefore ineligible for a Wikipedia article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as not only could the sources be better, my searches found nothing and mostly press releases here, here, here, here and here. There's nothing to suggest better improvement but feel free to restart when coverage is better. SwisterTwister talk 06:03, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am not so sure we should discount press releases as WP:RS, but I am just realizing that they are barely mentioned in the press release.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:36, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 08:04, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 08:04, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:02, 5 September 2015 (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.