Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electronic Eye Systems

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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 13:30, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Electronic Eye Systems

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

No evidence of any notability here. Another small company with an article full of spammy links. References do not even get close to WP:GNG Reads like an advertisement and could probably have been speedied had it not been around for so long Velella ^{Velella Talk} 09:56, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 12:00, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:51, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:51, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:51, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - None of this currently suggests even minimally better notability coverage for the applicable guidelines. SwisterTwister talk 06:30, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:59, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete sources don't appear to get at all close to demonstrating notability, apart from two magazine articles I haven't checked they're all listings of the company in various sites which were probably written by them. Article was presumably written as a promotional exercise as the author was in personal contact with the founders. Hut 8.5 16:18, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no coverage, much less coverage in reliable sources, just promotional (PR), advertising and sales. Fails WP:GNG, but more importantly fails [[WP:CORP. --Bejnar (talk) 08:12, 26 December 2015 (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.