Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sonatafy Technology


 * 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__. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:02, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Sonatafy Technology

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

Non-notable company. The London Daily Post link doesn't work, rest are staff directories and an award that doesn't seem notable. PROMO. Oaktree b (talk) 16:49, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Nevada. AllyD (talk) 17:11, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom - David Gerard (talk) 19:46, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment: The London Daily Post ref has a misspelt URL, presumably because the site is blacklisted and edits cannot be saved with the actual name. AllyD (talk) 05:44, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete I believe this article was created by a UPE farm account. There exists a draft, Draft:Sonatafy Technology, that was created by a user (User:Pegsthais) who is now blocked as a sockpuppet of a UPE farm.  The London Daily Post, Los Angeles Tribune, and NY Weekly sources might suggest notability, however I'm not sure how reliable they're considered—I'm guessing not very, since none have Wikipedia articles.  In addition to the London Daily Post URL as the user above suggested, I also noticed the NY Weekly URL is misspelled, potentially to also avoid blacklisting or detection otherwise?  Nonetheless, looking over these articles, they read like paid articles rather than genuine journalism. Uhai (talk) 15:52, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete, the sources are hot garbage. Known and blacklisted SEO sources (with the URLs slightly tweaked to avoid the filter), paid placement SEO-friendly sites, Forbes paid council posts, other PR. The awards are nonsense. Sam Kuru (talk) 17:27, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: As per submission. Samuel R Jenkins (talk) 05:56, 30 April 2023 (UTC) Blocked sock. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:49, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: An article about a recent IT staffing firm. The awards listed in previous versions do not appear inherently notable and while searches find articles by the company principal about their operating field, I am not seeing the coverage needed to demonstrate attained notability. AllyD (talk) 07:36, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not seeing sourcing sufficient to pass GNG/NCORP. Rupples (talk) 03:45, 1 May 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.