Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MPOWERD Inc.


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 11:52, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

MPOWERD Inc.

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Violates WP:PROMO..."engineers renewable energy artifacts". It is a small company and its only product is a solar-powered lantern. None of the sources that aren't regurgitated press releases and PR discusses the company in detail. Pontificalibus (talk) 12:17, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 12:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 12:36, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 12:37, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Move to draft for the time being as the company may have the potential to expand and grow further in the near future. For the WP:PROMO part, I think cleanup will do. Ernestchuajiasheng (talk) 13:29, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Luci (solar powered light) or something along those lines. The thing they make is definitely notable, even if the company is borderline. South Nashua (talk) 21:58, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep per Luci light they produce, which seems to be notable.RelaxedTim (talk) 11:01, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: I've cleaned up as suggested. Sorry if the initial draft had promotional tone, I'm relatively new to Wikipedia and I'm still learning. Fabio Holanda (talk) 19:21, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 06:12, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete -- WP:TOOSOON; the company is not encyclopedically relevant just yet. There isn't much to move to draft, as the article now consists of two sentences. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:54, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete insufficient reference to meet WP:GNG. Three references are talking about product Luci not the company. The remaining are trivial mentions and passing referring. Note: A product of company can be notable, while the company is not notable see WP:PRODUCT. While this is look-alike case, the coverage of the product is also not yet sufficient to merit an article. But the company itself completely fails WP:CORP and have very long way to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. So the WP:TOOSOON in the above comment also applies. –Ammarpad (talk) 06:04, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete excluded from Wikipedia by WP:NOTADVERTISING and non-notable per above comments. Rentier (talk) 10:36, 20 December 2017 (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.