Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pyras Technology

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. Consensus is that this corporation fails the notability guideline. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 09:29, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pyras Technology

[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)

Lack of sources to prove the notability of the article. Abishe (talk) 11:12, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Abishe (talk) 11:12, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Taiwan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:15, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Information on this company is primarily to be found in Mandarin, a language I do not read (I note that businesses in non-English speaking countries are heavily underrepresented on english wikipedia). However their accomplishments seem to stand for themselves in establishing notability, their hardware is above your head right now and they are one of the major subcontractors on a current jet fighter program, those appear to be significant contribution in their field. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 17:06, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Only trivial mentions from the sources, fails WP:CORP completely. STSC (talk) 06:23, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am unable to locate any significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content, fails GNG/WP:NCORP. That said, I have no doubt performed poorly at searching chinese sources. HighKing⁺⁺ 16:51, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete with regrets. @Horse Eye Jack: unfortunately wikipedia is interested not in what is true but what is verifiably true. There is just not any references in the English language to warrant an article, and unfortunately Chinese language publications in this content area are usually classified by the Chinese government. It's doubtful RS in any language will be found. Fails WP:SIGCOV. 4meter4 (talk) 07:48, 14 November 2019 (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.