Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KPI Green Energy

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 23:31, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KPI Green Energy

[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)

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources, whether on or off Wikipedia, should be viewed with caution, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI. The current page looks like a company advertisement copied onto Wikipedia. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 06:29, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 06:29, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Gujarat-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:31, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,

Salvio giuliano

08:45, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:27, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject seems to be notable, as I found some WP:SIGCOV. See, [1], [2], [3], and [4]. Taabii (talk) 18:14, 11 September 2025 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE --CNMall41 (talk) 02:47, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – KPI Green Energy has received coverage from several reliable, independent sources, including Business Standard (2025), which discussed the company’s nationwide expansion and renewable energy goals, and Hindustan Times (2024), which provided a critical perspective in light of market performance and project delivery.--This has to be edited (talk) 10:47, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@This has to be edited: - links? HighKing⁺⁺ 17:50, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The sources provided by Taabii are sufficient to establish notability. It is surprising the nominator does not acknowledge this. The subject clearly passes WP:GNG. Alex78695 (talk) 06:14, 13 September 2025 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE. ✗plicit 23:45, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Originally closed as "keep", but reopened as Alex78695 is a sockpuppet of Taabi.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:47, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Environment, and Gujarat. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:35, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This fails to satisfy WP:SIGCOV requirements as well as the more stringent requirements for WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. The new sources provided by Taabi are not appropriate for establishing notability as they are routine business/stock coverage or what appears to be a predatory journal article. Most of the references already in the article are routine business coverage that's useful for establishing fact but not notability.Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 11:18, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: after looking at the sources presented, agree with Anonrfjwhuikdzz. For example, the first source linked by Taabii is a roboadvisory firm that offers "DIY tools", others are stock reports, WP:ORGTRIV, not reliable, etc. S0091 (talk) 19:00, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I can't find anything outside the WP:CORPROUTINE either, including in Business Standard and Hindustan Times. Alpha3031 (t • c) 19:12, 27 September 2025 (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.