Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pluribus Networks (company)


 * 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. Michig (talk) 17:31, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Pluribus Networks (company)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Directly created by employee of company (disclosed here) under a variation of the name Pluribus Networks - they couldn't directly create under that name as it was salted after 1) the article was deleted following an an AFD in Feb 2014 and 2) that article was re-posted by a SPA in June 2014 and was speedy deleted per WP:G4.

Is the company now Notable? I went and looked for sources and removed chaff and added what substance I could in these diffs. In my view it is borderline. The growing consensus is that we delete articles about marginal subjects directly created (not through AfC) by conflicted editors where there is a clear effort to use Wikipedia for promotion, counter to WP:PROMO. Hence this nomination. Marginally notable; promotional. Jytdog (talk) 08:35, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:18, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:18, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:18, 7 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as closely examining the article only found this to be appear as if the article is filled the ample sourcing and otherwise apparent notability but considering my searches have found nothing better, there's simply nothing else convincing. SwisterTwister   talk  06:19, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete This is not really a newsworthy topic because no reliable sources cover this business entity. Hence, the exsitence of this article on Wikipedia serves as a platform for promotion only. The only independent reporting I have found are two articles in the web publication of "Business Insider", . It seems the first article is relying on a correlation between Jerry Yang and the company - and there really isn't one. Yang has invested in 50 startups and this happens to be one of them; so there is no notability to be found in this correlation. The second article covers, in part, the new CEO of this company -  and he is not a notable subject. Also, whatever the company itself is doing has not become newsworthy or noteworthy Steve Quinn (talk) 04:08, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. As specified, promotional  and only minimally notable at best.  DGG ( talk ) 04:20, 11 June 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.