Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PicNet


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 22:04, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

PicNet

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

I placed a PROD on this article last week with the rationale "A longstanding article about an IT Services firm of questionable notability, created in mainspace after a draft had been rejected multiple times. The article describes a small company going about its business without indication of notability. Searches find occasional listings for their products (e.g. PredictBench) but nothing to demonstrate that notability has been attained.". An Admin noticed that a previous article instance had been deleted at PROD in 2015 and so declined the PROD, so I am now bringing this to AfD on the same rationale as noted above. AllyD (talk) 20:45, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Australia. AllyD (talk) 20:45, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete I don’t see any in depth coverage in RIS. Mccapra (talk) 21:51, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete could not find significant coverage to meet WP:CORP. LibStar (talk) 00:00, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete no evidence of notability, and the material comparing its revenue to the average company revenue is rather pathetic Nick-D (talk) 10:32, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't seem to meet WP:NCORP or WP:GNG. -Kj cheetham (talk) 21:54, 10 July 2022 (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.