Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ZL 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. Vanamonde93 (talk) 21:40, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ZL 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)

Article lacks any secondary sources and I was unable to find any with a cursory search. Brandon (talk) 19:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and California. Brandon (talk) 19:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Cannot find any secondary sources with significant coverage either. Definitely not meeting WP:NORG in my opinion. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 21:22, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do not delete, ZL Tech meets the notability requirements.
Here are some examples of coverage:

NY Times

Global News Wire

Network World

Gartner (unpaid) VSZLTI (talk) 23:35, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete The given source is primary. No other independent sources available. Just a promotional effort. Rahmatula786 (talk) 10:40, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No obvious indication that adequate secondary sources exist. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:46, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: An article about a company. Regarding the sources offered by the WP:SPA above, the partnership announcement, lawsuit and product reviews fall under WP:CORPTRIV; I can't see the paywalled NYT one, but it appear to be a piece quoting a company rep, which would also not be relevant here. Searches find product comparison items, etc., but I am not seeing the coverage needed to demonstrate that this firm attained notability. AllyD (talk) 08:47, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is one source here, this does not reach the level of notability required for a business page. Needs more RSes to bolster notability. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 17:04, 12 May 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.