Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Netsurf Network

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. Tone 17:46, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Netsurf Network (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Trivial coverage in investor news, all their so-called 'research' has been published in predatory journals. No notability, sources all or nearly all trace back to parroting company claims. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:57, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:57, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 22:42, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - zero evidence of notability Spiderone 10:19, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Most of the sources in the article are reliable. I also found a few more reliable sources which talk about the activities of the company: [1], [2], [3] and [4]. It only needs some expansion. Other than that, the article is good enough to pass WP:NCORP. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 13:00, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Most such "reliable" sources are trivial (the company exists, it made money) the others simply parrot PR aimed for investors. There is no significant coverage. This is not a notable company. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:42, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, basing your !vote on "reliable sources" isn't a valid reason. Mostly, we assume the sources are reliable, as a given. We need to read the references to check that they have in-depth detail on the company as per WP:CORPDEPTH and the ask ourselves if the reference contains "Independent Content" as per WP:ORGIND. Had you done that, you would see that none of those references meet the criteria as they're rehashed company announcements and therefore clearly fail ORGIND.

• Delete Not a single reference (including the ones posted above) meets the criteria for establishing notability and I'm unable to locate and references that do. Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion nor is it a Yellow Pages. Topic fails GNG/NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 11:54, 16 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.