Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loomia (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. The history and current content of this article are about the older, failed company. No prejudice against creating a new article about the fabric company if and when notability can be established for that. RL0919 (talk) 07:07, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Loomia[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)

Company was not notable. Has had a may not meet notability guidelines template for 9 years. Jackfork (talk) 00:13, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 15:27, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 15:27, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 15:27, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: There has been some recent to-and-fro changing of the article to change focus from its original subject (the defunct San Francisco based tracking-recommendation platform) to the more recent New York based smart fabric start-up. Staying with the former, which gave rise to the longstanding notability tag: the provided references were largely routine funding and partnership announcements; the most substantial may be the Richard Becker blog entry. Searches are finding only more of the same, and nothing to provide detail on the company's demise sometime around 2010 - it seems to have sunk without being noticed. In sum, I don't see enough to demonstrate WP:NCORP or WP:NWEB notability. (Briefly considering the more recent start-up, while the Wired product review [1] may begin to contribute, I don't see enough to demonstrate attained notability yet - it is probably at best WP:TOOSOON and the text contributed by an IP was promotional.) AllyD (talk) 16:03, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:31, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CoolSkittle (talk) 00:55, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: does not meet WP:NCORP; coverage is in passing, routine notices and / or WP:SPIP. Corporate spam. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:12, 28 December 2018 (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.