Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EnergySage, Inc


 * 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. Michig (talk) 10:06, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

EnergySage, Inc

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I initially tagged this article under A7, because the only two claims to fame/significance were insignificant (but note that I'm strict with corporation articles). It was removed by another non-admin editor, but nonetheless, doing a source search, I most see press releases, earnings reports, and venture capital news that was written because a) the newspaper's only job was to repost press releases or such reports. The only sources I could find are indiscriminate coverage from the Boston Business Journal, some mentions in RS, and some blog posts (not RS), likely because of widespread WP:SPIP. With the current sourcing, only a permastub can be created from RS (also see WP:NOPAGE and WP:CORPDEPTH). Esquivalience t 04:39, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. clpo13(talk) 06:02, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. clpo13(talk) 06:02, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. clpo13(talk) 06:02, 31 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete for now and draft & userfy as News, browser and Highbeam found links but nothing to suggest better improvement although I compliment the author's neatness and sourcing. Pinging past users and .  SwisterTwister   talk  07:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak delete - I stand by my decision of removing the speedy. Although the company has received some coverage, I do think the subject needs some additional significant coverage from reliable sources. Move to draft or userspace as viable. Regards— UY Scuti Talk  07:19, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete for now - The company article needs more credible sources to back it up and needs more credible information that is not written like News or an Advertisement. I would wait until the company grows further with more information, then proceed with an article creation if it has enough credible sources/information.  A dog 104  Talk to me 12:30, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 20:25, 3 November 2015 (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.