Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Userssio Technologies

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:24, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Userssio Technologies

[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)

Not enough sources to pass WP:NCORP. This company has only been active for one year and has received no coverage from reliable sources. Badbluebus (talk) 18:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Products, and India. Badbluebus (talk) 18:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:28, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This paid editing bludgeoning from user needs to stop. Pages that have been moved to draft space are continuous moved back to mainspace. That aside, references do not meet WP:ORGCRIT to show notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:09, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've blocked the author as a sock, hence this is eligible for G5, but if it is preferred to let the AfD run its full course, that's also fine by me. If speedying is wanted, ping me. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:42, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'd have preferred G5, but I suppose this way, it's harder for future spammers to recreate so that works, too. --Yamla (talk) 11:51, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete-reviewing its cited sources seems to lack WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV, in which even a quick search on the company also shows the same trend. Villkomoses (talk) 13:48, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not even come close to being notable. I also found that the user uploaded this bogus earnings report with completely made-up numbers. Yuvaank (talk) 05:01, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Insufficient coverage by independent, reliable secondary sources to pass WP:GNG and WP:NCORP.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:25, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. Fails WP:NCORP. RangersRus (talk) 15:19, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteAs per NominationRahmatula786 (talk) 06:57, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete : Per nom. lack WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Does not pass WP: CORP. Gauravs 51 (talk) 12:18, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NCORP. Madeleine (talk) 03:25, 14 March 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.