Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Authena AG


 * 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. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:10, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Authena AG

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This company has some mentions online, but none of them are of the quality that would be considered significant coverage in a third-party source. They get trivial mentions in start-up rankings and some promo coverage. I haven't seen any coverage worthy of WP:GNG/WP:NCORP. Modussiccandi (talk) 18:33, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 18:33, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 18:33, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 18:33, 19 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment: there is this article where I'm not sure whether the company is behind it or not. They are given as a source in the article, but it's not made clear whether that's for the image or the article as a whole. Modussiccandi (talk) 18:37, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - turns out it's blockchain spam - David Gerard (talk) 19:29, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - Lacks reliable sources as reference. None of those available sources are acceptable and this article won't pass the notability guideline. Mommmyy (talk) 18:42, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: A new editor's first article, describing a start-up company's product proposition. There is a Forbes contributor article about a Swiss start-up award ("Luxury Venture Group Selects Its First Luxury Innovation Award Start-Up Winners") which contains some coverage of this firm, but neither that nor any other coverage that I am seeing goes beyond describing their product proposition. At this point, I am not seeing evidence of attained notability. AllyD (talk) 07:28, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: there is this article and this one that seems coming from quite reliable sources.
 * There's reliability and depth of coverage, which needs to be appropriately high to count toward notability. I can't speak to the reliability of the Italian-language source (perhaps other participants can?) but I would say that it constitutes significant coverage. For the German-language source, the opposite is the case: it's certainly reliable but I can't speak to the depth of coverage because it's behind a paywall. Modussiccandi (talk) 15:48, 26 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete no significant news coverage is available. Boredathome101 (talk) 01:24, 27 October 2021 (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.