Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solv

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. ✗plicit 00:16, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Solv

[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)

I am wondering what makes this company notable to be able to have a stand alone article on Wikipedia? Surya^beej ^⋠talk⋡ 16:02, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Surya^beej ^⋠talk⋡ 16:02, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Surya^beej ^⋠talk⋡ 16:02, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Surya^beej ^⋠talk⋡ 16:02, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Press releases are not reliable sources. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 02:59, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify Times of India and Business Standard can be considered as reliable local news media. But it still lacks reference from reliable sources.Mommmyy (talk) 19:14, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Before creating the current mainspace article about an Indian e-commerce platform, the new editor who created it first appropriated and then blanked the pre-existing Draft:Solv, which hitherto had been about a US-based health firm of the same name: [1]. I am dubious about the notability of that firm either, though some coverage can be found, but have restored its draft. AllyD (talk) 12:52, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: A promotionally-worded presentation of a new platform's market proposition. The available coverage is routine, falling under trivial coverage at WP:CORPDEPTH, aside perhaps from the Business Standard piece (23 April 21) reporting speculation by "sources" about its future. If there was an article about Standard Chartered's SC Ventures then it might have provided a suitable redirect target, but I am not seeing the coverage needed to demonstrate attained notability (WP:NCORP/WP:GNG). AllyD (talk) 12:53, 23 October 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.