Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Poolside AI
- 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 keep. Miminity's skilled source assessment has been uncontested for a week now. Owen× ☎ 12:52, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Poolside AI (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
More "upstart" vanity spam - utterly non notable at this point. nothing in the way of in depth coverage and the passign mentions are...exactly that. CUPIDICAE❤️ 22:33, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment - The article needs work, but I searched for this entity on Google News, and I found this Bloomberg article, but I cannot find academic journal articles on the subject. Z. Patterson (talk) 23:07, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment - I could not find academic journal articles specifically about Poolside AI, but I found two technical papers that briefly mentioned it. This technical paper only mentions a Poolside AI employee as a credit, and this technical paper mentions Poolside AI as a statistic. Other than that, I cannot find WP:SIGCOV in the academic journals and technical reports. Z. Patterson (talk) 23:12, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and France. Shellwood (talk) 23:37, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:22, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
- Keep - This company has been mentionned in various independant and reliable sources. It is also quite a significant AI company in term of valuation (3B$). Pollockito (talk) 15:42, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Pollockito: Please drop the sources you are talking about so we can assess it Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 14:53, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
- Sure, here are some of them :
-
- Usine Nouvelle - Dedicated article - [[2]]
-
- MIT Technology Review - mentioning poolside as a major AI company - [[4]]
-
- Silicon Angle - dedicated article - [[6]]
-
- Financial Times - mentioning poolside as a major AI company - [[7]]
- Business Insider - dedicated article - [[8]]
- Geekwire - mention - [[9]]
- Pollockito (talk) 16:16, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Pollockito: Please drop the sources you are talking about so we can assess it Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 14:53, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:40, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
| Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Seems like it
|
Base on the Wiki page
|
|
✔ Yes | |
 Paywalled
|
Per Wikipedia Page
|
Paywalled
|
? Unknown | |
|
|
|
|
✔ Yes | |
|
|
|
 Brief Mention
|
✘ No | |
|
|
|
|
✔ Yes | |
|
|
|
|
? Unknown | |
| Paywalled
|
|
Paywalled
|
? Unknown | |
|
|
~ WP:BUSINESSINSIDER | A whole section for it
|
~ Partial | |
|
|
|
WP:PARTIAL
|
✘ No | |
| This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}. | ||||
- Base on assessment above, I lean towards Weak Keep. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 06:39, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
- 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.