Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TechSee

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. RL0919 (talk) 04:48, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TechSee

[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)

Sources provided by author do not adequately demonstrate notability. Balkywrest (talk) 10:29, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 10:41, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 10:41, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 10:41, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep No reason to delete an article the moment it is created. Certainly there is room for improvement, but at the moment, there are several solid sources attesting to notability. What ever happened to the policy of not biting the newbies?Geewhiz (talk) 11:02, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No actually reliable references for showing notability , though you have to actually look at them to realize that. Being a Gartner Cool Vendor is the best, and its a trivial distinction; ditto for a very minor mention by Telecrunch. DGG ( talk ) 05:22, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 00:04, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: does not meet WP:NCORP / WP:CORPDEPTH. Promotionalism only. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:30, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I added another source citing Accenture's partnership with TechSee. I believe I have demonstrated notability - we were selected as a Gartner Cool Vendor and had dedicated articles (not minor mentions) about our technology written up on TechCrunch and The Verge, major tech journalism sites, and Intelligent CIO, a prominent trade publication.Jakegreenblatt (talk) 11:31, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, promo article; not shown notable for stand alone article, per WP:Corp. Kierzek (talk) 15:48, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Does not pass WP:CORP. This is a clearly promotional article. Skirts89 (talk) 17:01, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — Whether the article was created a day or a year ago is irrelevant—notability is what counts. However, this is clearly a promotional article.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 23:33, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete References fail the criteria for establishing notability, topic fails WP:NCORP and GNG. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:01, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete References are self-serving. It's getting snowy outside.49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 06:33, 10 January 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.