Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/10x Management

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 no consensus. Due to limited participation after two relists there is no consensus for this discussion. Recommend waiting at least a couple of months before any possible renomination. Barkeep49 (talk) 02:06, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10x Management

[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 companies, the references don't add up and one is a blog.   Kadzi   (talk) 18:04, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.   Kadzi   (talk) 18:04, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:14, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep an early pioneer in the field, frequently used as an example, for example in the (2015) book Getting a Coding Job For Dummies. Seems to get a fair amount of press, much of which is not currently represented in the article. --Bejnar (talk) 19:09, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable with no assertion of notability. --Lockley (talk) 01:36, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Claim to notability is as a pioneer in the agency representation of programmers and other highly-sought IT professionals. In addition to meeting WP:GNG requirements of significant independent coverage. --Bejnar (talk) 22:24, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amkgp 💬 18:21, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Getting a "fair amount" of press (even in reputable publications) is not enough for a reference to establish notability. The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. Usually, analyst reports which profile a company are considered good references but the Forrester report that mentions this company is a mention without a company profile. The Economist article relies on information provided by a co-founder and fails ORGIND. The Bloomberg reference doesn't have any in-depth information on the company and fails WP:CORPDEPTH and is more about the experiences of software engineers than the company itself. The New Yorker magazine piece is really churnalism where the journalist is a fly-on-the-wall of a client's experience in deciding to hire 10x and also fails WP:ORGIND as it relies on information provided by the company or their client. The NYT article is a blog post and fails WP:RS. Topic fails GNG/WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 14:18, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment with regard to its pioneering aspect see, for example, Altringer, Beth. "Globetrotting Digital Nomads: The Future of Work or Too Good to Be True." Forbes Leadership Forum. 2015., Younger, Jon. "How learning and development are becoming more agile." Harvard Business Review. 2016., "Silicon Valley Goes Hollywood: Top Coders Can Now Get Agents" Bloomberg Businessweek April 2013 (subscription required) and in Russian: Красов, Вадим Олегович. "ОСОБЕННОСТИ УПРАВЛЕНИЯ ЧЕЛОВЕЧЕСКИМИ РЕСУРСАМИ В СЕКТОРЕ ИНФОРМАЦИОННЫХ ТЕХНОЛОГИЙ." Экономическая среда 3 (2016): 139-142. (subscription required) and Chinese: "独家解密硅谷程序员经纪公司码农变身巨星". --Bejnar (talk) 19:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:26, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- Response This article (PDF) was originally published on Forbes sites and as a blog posting, fails WP:RS. This from Harvard Business Review is a single mention-in-passing "As importantly,more and more top agile talents, for example those represented by 10X Management, are only interested in working in environments where the work is interesting, and they are welcomed as a team member.", fails WP:CORPDEPTH. This from Bloomberg is entirely based on an interview with a co-founder, fails WP:ORGIND. The reference from lanbook.com (in Russian) briefly mentions the company on page 3 to note that 10x is based in Silicon Valley and former programmers work there (Так, в Кремниевой долине появилась компания по поиску талантов - 10X Management . В ней работают бывшие программисты и продюсеры.), fails WP:CORPDEPTH. This from sohu.com is also entirely based on an interview with a co-founder, fails WP:ORGIND. None of those references meet the criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 15:03, 9 July 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.