Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agriya


 * 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. North America1000 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Agriya

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

From Promotional writing of an article to references. Everything is promotional and nothing else. No-notability of this organization. Still trying to find what NYtimes really covered for this one? all other references are PR exercise of company or clearly influenced by the company the way it is being covered by media. wikipedia is not a portfolio or directory of such company. Light2021 (talk) 06:10, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete this is not a notable company. The references clearly do not demonstrate significant coverage of this company. There is no significant coverage available elsewhere, never mind independent coverage (there isn't any) - it fails WP:CORPDEPTH and GNG. This company piggy backs its apps onto software such as Facebook and Groupon by imitating these without copyright infringement - there is no significant impact by anything developed by this company.
 * To answer the question pertaining to New York Times coverage, there is a one line mention of this topic in the article discussing niche web companies that have emerged - by carving out "territory" from Groupon and drilling down -.
 * The article notes, "Groupon caters to the masses, which means avoiding the obscure corners of any particular product niche." and "Why jump into the gold rush when you can sell picks and shovels to the prospectors?" Steve Quinn (talk) 04:02, 20 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as corporate spam, with sections such as "Headquarters: The company's headquarters is located in Kamdar Nagar, Chennai. There are 200+ employees in its headquarters". Wikipedia is not WP:WEBHOST for a company's web site materials. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete by all means as I have been watching this and the sheer floods of several accounts show the blatancy of advertising and how the article is literally only consisting of company-initiated information, therefore there's no actual notability and it's a damn advertisement, sufficient enough to delete at any time, especially when such news sources as the ones listed are notorious for pay-for news. SwisterTwister   talk  22:39, 20 October 2016 (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.