Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geeetech


 * 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. I don't find the sole keep vote compelling, given that it does not even articulate how the subject is "clearly notable", let alone provide any sources that back up that claim. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 02:11, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Geeetech

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

Created by someone with a strong COI and was reviewed automatically, courtesy WP:APAT. This page is clearly a marketing piece and has no place on Wikipedia. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. US-Verified (talk) 23:45, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and China. Shellwood (talk) 00:02, 19 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Almost all of the coverage is about their 3D printers, not the company. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH as there is almost to no coverage about the actual company. During my search, this was the only source I found about the company: . Carpimaps (talk) 00:04, 19 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per explanation above. Nocturnal781 (talk) 23:20, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete no sources found about the company itself. Most of the results on Google are stuff like review articles and how-to tutorials. Mucube (talk • contribs) 22:15, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep clearly notable and no evidence of the claimed COI is given. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:03, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I have striked part of my nomination rationale that I realize was inappropriate (this should be decided on WP:ANI). But this article's notability is very weak. Could you please share at least two in-depth articles (independent coverage) about Geeetech? "Clearly notable" but how? US-Verified (talk) 00:28, 23 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete - I cannot find any significant coverage in reliable independent sources about the company itself. Almost all the sources in the article are product reviews, some of which are on sites that look like little more than promotional blogs or even actual storefronts. And the article is mainly a listing of products, running afoul of WP:NOTCATALOG as well. —Torchiest talkedits 03:12, 23 March 2023 (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.