Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trove (company)

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:21, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Trove (company)

[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)

This promotional article doesn't seem to pass WP:CORP KartikeyaS (talk) 08:29, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 11:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 11:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I removed most of the article, since it has been expanded with marketing babble. I think the info that is there now could form the basis for an encyclopedic article about the company, and that we should keep the article.Freediving-beava (talk) 12:45, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closer for soft deletion:? While this discussion appears to have no quorum, it is NOT eligible for soft deletion because it has been previously PROD'd (via summary). --Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 02:23, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Pretty thin RS for this company, possibly they may qualify for one in the future. Deathlibrarian (talk) 06:48, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I am not altogether sure this organisation has notability; the references - thin as Deathlibrarian says, all talk about rebranding and services but this really does not seem like any real notability for this company. --Whiteguru (talk) 12:00, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NCORP. scope_creep^Talk 20:30, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of 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 GNG/WP:NCORP. HighKing 21:26, 13 September 2020 (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.