Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Icreon


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 21:01, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Icreon

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non Notable Uncletomwood (talk) 07:43, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a very weird case. The article is poorly sourced and the references cited aren't adequate to prove notability. However, there is an abundance of small mentions in articles that cite, quote, or are attributed to their CEO. There is coverage in Reliable Sources to be found, including this: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jlim/2015/03/10/icreon-tech-moves-offshore-from-india-onshore-to-america/#7257c56928eb ... it's a case where things we might accept as Reliable Sources are buried among real news articles, in respected publications, that we will dismiss because they are "Self Authored". Also,there's an article for their US subsidiary here, which isn't being AFD'd ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icreon_Tech ), while the article for their CEO is being AFD'd as seen here: ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Himanshu_Sareen ). ...suggest that their fates should be tied together. BoyRD (talk) 01:55, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:11, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:11, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  19:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as this is incredibly all PR, the article itself, its sources and then also the sources above; none of it comes close at all to both being substantial and non-PR, not to mention anything to at least base an acceptable article. SwisterTwister   talk  23:00, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete -- a non notable company. Coverage is trivial, PR or PR like, and insufficient to meet GNG and CORPDEPTH. The Forbes article is a puff piece, and it's about Icreon Tech in the first place. (This article could also stand to undergo an AfD). K.e.coffman (talk) 04:47, 26 August 2016 (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.