Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brights (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. ✗plicit 15:00, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brights (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)

Unremarkable outsourcing company, fails WP:CORP. No significant coverage in reliable secondary sources in a WP:BEFORE search, sources are all press releases or passing mentions. "Awards" are inclusion in two long lists of service providers on Clutch.co. Borderline speedy db-corp. Article's edit history strongly suggests paid editing. Wikishovel (talk) 15:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, Poland, and Ukraine. Wikishovel (talk) 15:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Spam/catalogue entry with nothing to suggest this meets WP:NCOMPANY. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:44, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- agree with nom that as a company they are unremarkable so can't see a reason for them to have an article, and the type of coverage backs this up.Editing84 (talk) 19:23, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Absence of sourcing that meet GNG/WP:NCORP for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 16:39, 7 August 2024 (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.