Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SharpSpring

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. No opinion on what should be done with SMTP (company); feel free to restore to maintain attribution if it's decided that the content should be merged or moved. ansh 666 09:08, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SharpSpring

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

Somewhat promotional article on� minor company that should not have been accepted from AfC.Written by COI editor from the company itself who changed their user name to make their affiliation less obvious. It looks at first sight that there are many references, but they are all either PR or notices, or placement in a list. FAST 5000 is not sufficient to imply notability . DGG ( talk ) 03:40, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am a little unclear on the relationship between this and SMTP (company), which supposedly acquired SharpSpring and then adopted its name. This raises the question, should SMTP also be deleted. If not, then merge SharpSpring there (at whichever title is supported by sources as the common name). bd2412 T 04:31, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 07:05, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 07:05, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I based my accept somewhat on WP:LISTED. However it is more promotional than I remember. The relationship is confusing. AKAIK SharpSpring was acquired by SMTP, their stock ticker changed to SHSP, then the SMTP portion of the business was sold to some other company. I did notice that many of the sources were press releases; some are not, though, [1] is interview (not that great still though) and company description sort of thing and I think some of the other gainesville sun articles are not presss releases. Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:00, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(1) There's a strong presumption that companies listed on the NYSE ar notable`. but this should not reasonably extent to NASDAQ; there are a few major (and even famous) companies there, but most are probably below what we or anyone else would call notable .

2)The interview you mention is not a true interview, but an opportunity or the president of the company to say whatever he chooses to The lead paragraph makes it clear" "SharpSpring’s founder and CEO credits its rapid rise to stripping away the trappings and focusing on the mission." This is advertising, not reporting.

3)the company description sort of articles are essentially directory listings, and not not ieven imply notability . DGG ( talk ) 21:28, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mention any interview (the sources aren't really relevant to my question). I merely asked whether SMTP should also be deleted; if not, I would think SharpSpring can be merged there. bd2412 T 02:02, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete ,,, as corporate spam. Hey you, yeah you! (talk) 07:46, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:58, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:58, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the article is written as WP:PROMO and does not have sufficient notability as many of of the links are from a single source "Gainsville Sun and are mostly company press releases. Hagennos (talk) 05:46, 10 December 2017 (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.