Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kadiska


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 04:42, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Kadiska

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

Coverage is routine funding announcements and PR items, I find nothing about them otherwise. Oaktree b (talk) 04:27, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Oaktree b (talk) 04:27, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete, does not meet WP:NCORP. Routine coverage, PR, etc. &mdash;siro&chi;o 06:31, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Plenty of sources are there... The article in CIO review offers a complete analysis of the company history and achievements. The notability and credibility are also confirmed by the awards won!Art&#38;football (talk) 23:43, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:17, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source 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. In plain English, this means that 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. Here, the references are simply regurgitating company announcements or interviews with executives and have no "Independent Content" in the form of independent analysis/fact checking/opinion/etc. The CIO article mentioned above by  is based entirely on an interview with the CEO and fails ORGIND and I am unable to locate any sources that meet GNG/NCORP criteria.   HighKing++ 17:29, 14 July 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.