Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sensibo

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 15:40, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sensibo[edit]

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

Is having the "funniest pitch video of 2014" a claim of notability (god save us). Otherwise, seems to be a thoroughly unremarkable business, which has maybe attracted a bit of novelty attention, but nothing of real note. TheLongTone (talk) 14:31, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — CutestPenguin^Hangout 16:11, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I'd usually second your assessment, but with this case I'm not so sure. It has coverage in several languages across a period of 2 years and could probably have a case for passing WP:GNG. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:26, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 03:07, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Well, Amen, LongTone, may God save us from many of the things that get covered in reliable sources. However, moving along, here's my simple search for Sensibo on google news [1] That's a lot of non-trivial coverage in serious places, and coverage in RS is the WP:N metric.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:55, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ☮JAaron95 ^Talk 15:09, 14 August 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.