Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clutch (company)


 * 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.  Sandstein  17:43, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Clutch (company)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NCORP. Sources are either passing mentions, press releases, or the company's own website. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 14:09, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 14:09, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

The article is heavily refbombed, so here is a source-by-source analysis:


 * 1) Company's own website
 * 2) Not significant coverage, per WP:CORPDEPTH
 * 3) Not significant coverage – single paragraph on company funding, and then a paragraph copied from the company's website
 * 4) Not significant coverage, per WP:CORPDEPTH
 * 5) Not significant coverage, per WP:CORPDEPTH
 * 6) Company's own website
 * 7) Press release
 * 8) Press release
 * 9) Press release
 * 10) Company's own website
 * 11) Press release
 * 12) Not significant coverage, per WP:CORPDEPTH
 * 13) Not a reliable source – company blog post
 * 14) Probably a press release
 * 15) Company's own website
 * 16) Press release
 * 17) Not significant coverage, doesn't seem like a reliable source
 * 18) Press release
 * 19) Not significant coverage, doesn't seem like a reliable source
 * 20) Not an independent source
 * 21) Company's own website
 * 22) Company's own website
 * 23) Press release
 * 24) Company's own website
 * 25) Not significant coverage – one sentence mention
 * 26) Not significant coverage – one sentence mention
 * 27) Not significant coverage – doesn't even mention the company
 * 28) Company's own website
 * 29) Company's own website
 * 30) Company's own website
 * 31) Company's own website
 * 32) One of the better sources in the article; however, it is focused on a specific survey by Visual Objects and not the Clutch parent company

Nothing here establishes the company's notability. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 14:42, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:56, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * I agree that this page seems not relevant and delectable –garbaonzo
 * Hi! This company is pretty much the main company in the world that provides B2B reviews which seems notable — TripAdvisor, Yelp and more have pages, as does sites like Epinions which seems much less notable. Also, they're a relatively influential business data publisher — would it be better if I provide more links to citations like number 32 which you highlight as a better one? I can go through and add those — I thought press releases counted as a third party source and they're more direct, but I can go back and add more references showing third party media coverage on their work. It's my first time writing an article on a company, so let me know what I need so I can make this work!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmillers82 (talk • contribs) 13:26, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 10:18, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. - Hatchens (talk) 07:23, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete : majority of the sources cited are the company's website. The few reliable sources are press releases. The content is promotional. CryforJustice (talk) 16:11, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep : I added new sources to help establish notability (see 12, 13, and 14). If these help to establish notability, I can add more! Let me know what's best here — again I've never written a company page before and am trying to make this work so I'd appreciate feedback to improve the page. Mmillers82 (talk) 01:52, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * None of the sources you added provide significant coverage of the company—only single sentence mentions. This is not sufficient to meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for company's, which is one of the strictest notability guidelines. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 02:25, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I added citation 16 of significant coverage, and'll go back and add some more real soon! Thanks for the help Lord Bolingbroke Mmillers82 (talk) 15:06, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * That new citation is entirely based on a company announcement on raising funds with quotations and information provided by the company. Fails the criteria for establishing notability.  HighKing++ 15:44, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. None of the references in the article meet the criteria and having searched myself I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria. Topic fails GNG/WP:NCORP.  HighKing++ 15:44, 23 June 2020 (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.