Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Credibly (company) (2nd nomination)


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:00, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Credibly (company)
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

I guess this has been recreated—wasn't quite sure what had happened here initially, but as I was planning on commenting on the previous AFD I guess I may as well nom it. I couldn't find anything useful in my own search. Editing history of the creator also seems a bit odd but I'm not too familiar with that kind of thing. Alpha3031 (t • c) 16:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC) Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  05:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies,  and Michigan. Alpha3031 (t • c) 16:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per my rationale at the previous AFD. The only indepth sourcing is not from reliable sources. ~ A412  talk! 20:02, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:06, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep Created the article as good faith. I believe the subject passes GNG on the basis of independent references. JSS24 (talk) 17:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Good faith is irrelevant. To a first approximation all articles, no matter how lacking in notability they may be, are created in good faith. Athel cb (talk) 09:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Probably not all articles, heh. It's possible the range p-block on the IP is just collateral though. I mean, I wouldn't bet money on it but it's possible. Alpha3031 (t • c) 17:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep: Evidences are available to prove subject's Notability Guidelines. And passes GNG. 2409:40D0:10CE:A5F:1C4F:A30E:B72D:E5DA (talk) 05:33, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * "This user is currently blocked." What more is there to say? Delete. Athel cb (talk) 09:06, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a company therefore references need to meet GNG/WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability. Nothing I can find meets the criteria, mostly just PR and company announcements and profiles, all generated either by the company or regurgitating company provided/generated information, nothing that meets WP:CORPDEPTH/WP:ORGIND.  HighKing++ 09:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Lack of significant coverage from reliable sources other than routine coverage. Air on White (talk) 07:19, 8 May 2024 (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.