Draft talk:Identiv

Discussion on WikiProject Companies
Urbourbo (talk) 09:53, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for following up on the above discussion with your comment here. That is probably the best source as per my current knowledge. I'm thinking there might be reports from financial analysts as well, but the problem is that they are often not freely available. I'm taking some action here already and will add if/when I get access to some, but any input regarding where/how to obtain such reports could be useful. Either way, for a company of this size and age that's also listed on Nasdaq, personally I can feel that it should be considered notable even without further sources, and of value to Wikipedia readers to get access to a verifiable and concise text about the subject. For others to assess though of course. All the best, /Urbourbo (talk) 13:21, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand you "feel that it should be considered notable," but we need to have the sources per WP:ORGCRIT in order to show that it is notable. Reports from financial analysis is not going to meet that criteria, even if readily available. Even publicly traded companies are not considered notable based on their financial statements. I see from the talk page discussion on the company Wiki project you were unable to provide me with the additional sources. If you can do so here and resubmit I will be glad to take another look but unless there are sources that pass ORGCRIT, it likely will not pass AfC.--CNMall41 (talk) 21:00, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've done quite some research but I'm afraid we'll have to do without such additional sources for now. Any way, I've now removed the Products section as the only way I can see to make the concise article to appear as less of an "advertisement" as per the decline note. Hence, I'm taking my chances to resubmit in the hope that editors will find the current sources acceptable for minimal notability. All the best, /Urbourbo (talk) 11:00, 18 July 2023 (UTC)