Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saggezza


 * 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. I'm discounting the unsourced allegations of wrongdoing by the IP, which in any case would not establish notability.  Sandstein  11:13, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Saggezza

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non notable organization that fails to satisfy WP:NCORP as they lack in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources. A before search links me predominantly to primary sources which we do not consider as reliable. The REF-BOMBING is merely a mirage to induce a sense of notability. Celestina007 (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete - likely paid-for spam, creator blocked for spamming. My gut says this is a sock-created article but am not confident to push the delete button. MER-C 16:10, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - clearly a corporate stooge sock puppet, but company's tech was bought by Cisco, and they partner with other major data companies. Notability in sourcing might not be there, but company clearly works with shady companies and uses large amounts of consumer data, and their presence and NSA connections should be exposed. 24.237.27.195 (talk) 18:53, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * If sourcing isn’t present then the article isn’t notable. See WP:NCORP. Celestina007 (talk) 19:07, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I completely agree - I think it's an absolute shame companies can hide behind WP:NCORP as a way to conceal their activities and connections, especially those involved in massive data breaches with obvious concerns to the greater public - which Salesforce went out of their way not to notify anyone about, because of course they did. I'd be interested to know if anyone involved in this page has any COI they'd like to disclose - I don't see why we're so eager to employ extremely broad guidelines to provide cover for the companies sharing access to all our private information (one of many reasons I'm not using my normal account for this discussion). 24.237.27.195 (talk) 20:17, 22 February 2021 (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.