Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/STI International

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. Randykitty (talk) 16:30, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

STI International[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)

Sennecaster and I were unable to find any sources giving in-depth coverage of this company, to the point that I highly doubt it meets WP:NCORP. The article is currently entirely sourced to the company website and associated press releases. About the best source is this, which is rather promotional in tone, and only covers the name change. ƒirefly ( t · c ) 19:38, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. ƒirefly ( t · c ) 19:38, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. ƒirefly ( t · c ) 19:38, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. ƒirefly ( t · c ) 19:38, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I originally went to this page as part of a CCI. Much of the information is again, parsed from the company website. I have a feeling there is some vague paraphrasing going on as well in the actual prose, not even relating to the content. I am not a content editor, again, I came here from CCI. I suggest deletion, as it has no notability under Wikipedia policy and a quick search returns up very little reliable sources. The promotional tone of the article CAN be fixed, but in addition to the lack of WP:NCORP I think this is the best course of action. Sennecaster (talk) 19:54, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Is the adoption of the Staccato 2011 by the United States Marshals Service's Special Operations Group (noted in this subsection, with this source), enough to make the company and/or the 2011 notable? RadiculousJ (talk) 14:17, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, that's a good point. However, it's one of the only sources then that is notable. I won't be opposed to keeping if more sources like the one you provided were found (not just by you, but by others as well). Sennecaster (talk) 10:53, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of deep or significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. None of the references in the article meet the criteria and having searched I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria. Topic fails WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 17:35, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - small gun company. Bearian (talk) 15:48, 7 April 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.