Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hoverlay


 * 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 Rlendog (talk)

Hoverlay

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

Semi-advertorialized article about a company, not properly sourced as passing our notability criteria for companies. As always, companies are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH on their sourceability -- but this is referenced entirely to primary sources that are not support for notability at all, with the exception of a single brief glancing namecheck of its existence in a very short CBS news story that isn't about it. Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt it from having to be the subject of a lot more media coverage than just one news blurb. Bearcat (talk) 12:40, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 12:40, 1 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Agree with nom, sources in the article are mostly from the company itself and talking about some "art exhibits" they've set up with VR. This is what I find in most sources, the company has an app that's used to make xyz virtual reality thing on the waterfront or wherever. No coverage in depth about the company. Delete unless we can find articles talking about the company. Oaktree b (talk) 14:13, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I can't edit at the moment, but I intend on adding more sources from external news article mentioning Hoverlay, some include CBS, NBC, IT World Canada, and boston.com. Sola1ree (talk) 19:55, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * https://www.boston.com/culture/lifestyle/2019/05/16/augmented-reality-art-exhibit-greenway/
 * https://www.12news.com/video/news/local/valley/art-and-augmented-reality-make-the-perfect-combination-in-scottsdale/75-8a120cf0-e84b-4f0f-9e4c-692fca4144ab
 * https://www.itworldcanada.com/blog/disruption-nonprofits-should-embrace-it/443508
 * https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/augmented-reality-rose-kennedy-greenway-art-project-conservancy-sheila-novak/ Sola1ree (talk) 19:55, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I have many more, and you can find some at https://www.hoverlay.com/newsroom/ Sola1ree (talk) 20:05, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I believe I've fixed the "advertising" speech, feel free to make changes if some of the language seems inappropriate. Sola1ree (talk) 19:57, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete I find mentions of the product by this company but nothing that would support the un-referenced statements in this article. Also note that user Sola1ree has been blocked as an assumed COI. They are an evidenced SPA. Lamona (talk) 05:15, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP guidelines apply which requires references that discuss the topic (ie the *company*) in detail. WP:SIRS tells us that *each* reference must meet all the criteria for establishing notability - at least two deep or significant sources containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "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. References cannot rely *only* on information provided by the company such as articles that rely entirely on quotations, press releases, announcements, interviews, website information, etc - even when slightly modified. If it isn't *clearly* showing independent content then it fails ORGIND. Also, quantity of "coverage" isn't relevant - a million "mentions" or single-sentence descriptions does not meet the criteria, nor can multiple sources be combined. We just need two good quality independent sources that discusses the topic company in detail.
 * In this case, we don't have that. Most of the references are either primary sources from the company website, or mentions-in-passing when talking about one of the company's projects. Topic therefore fails WP:NCORP.  HighKing++ 18:54, 8 February 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.