Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hedgehog Security


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:30, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hedgehog Security

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable company. Sources are all name-drops or written by the subject, with one being a mystery novel for some strange reason. Google News turns up nothing better (String: "Hedgehog Security"). —A little blue Bori v^_^v  Onward to 2020 22:01, 6 April 2020 (UTC)


 *  Delete  : Fails to meet WP:N - Tatupiplu'talk
 * You tagged it for CSD even when the article just started. I think you really need to read the WP:NPP and WP:CSD. Altutmir (talk) 22:09, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Rather interesting for a self-professed high school student to be familiar with either policy. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Onward to 2020 22:19, 6 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep - the company has been widely cited in multiple independent reliable sources like Forbes, Computer Weekly, The Guardian and several other sources. Easily meets WP:ORGCRITE. Altutmir (talk) 22:06, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Those are name-drops and worthless as citations. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Onward to 2020 22:18, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you please make a policy based argument? I don't get what you mean by name-drops. In the nomination you linked it with WP:QUESTIONABLE but none of these are questionable sources. The Forbes post is also written by their staff, not any guest contributor. Altutmir (talk) 22:22, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * What I mean by name-drops is that they are passing mentions that only, at best, tell you the subject's name and a sound bite from one of its principals. Passing mentions are not acceptable as sources as literally any source that discusses the subject in some depth will include this information and more besides. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Onward to 2020 22:29, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:20, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:21, 6 April 2020 (UTC)


 * delete straight up paid for spam with 0 reliable sources. Praxidicae (talk) 22:48, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Insufficient depth of coverage; being quoted in a few articles is not enough. OhNo itsJamie Talk 23:31, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete There's no in-depth, none trivial coverage of the company in the sources. Like one articles talks about them, but is about features of a software update. Which is totally trivial. The other articles mainly seem to be about other topics and just briefly discuss them. Also, doing a search doesn't turn up anything usable. --Adamant1 (talk) 17:50, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, the software update that Adamant1 mentions isn't actually about this company - it's just something that mentions the words "Hedgehog security" in the right order while referring to something else. Various other sources similarly have no connection whatsoever to the content they're cited for. The only reliable secondary source that actually confirms the statement it's cited for is the local newspaper cited for the sports sponsorship. And that's no more than a name-drop. Huon (talk) 23:05, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete I am unable to locate any significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content, topic therefore fails GNG/WP:NCORP.  HighKing++ 19:15, 12 April 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.