Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vishwa Robotics


 * 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. Sorry, but consensus appears to be that the sources given are not adequate. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:29, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Vishwa Robotics

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A university spinoff (very common: I have a friend who has three of them). Article created by a WP:SPA almost certainly associated with the company. Notability is claimed by inheritance, they built one project for the Air Force Research Laboratory. Might be worth a redirect to Bhargav Gajjar, also written by the same SPA. Guy (Help!) 13:52, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 16:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 16:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)


 * delete fails WP:NCORP by miles. Hammered by same set of MEAT/SOCKs that have worked on the page about Gajjar. See COIN Jytdog (talk) 18:18, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * delete Assert the WP:NCORP standard. scope_creep (talk) 11:03, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Request to remove notices, significant new information has come to light about Vishwa Robotics, the company is working on cutting edge robotics projects for many different US Military branches such as Air Force, Navy, DARPA, NASA etc besides the first Air Force project. ref: https://govtribe.com/vendor/vishwa-robotics-and-automation-llc-aerospace-robotics-arlington-ma From vishwarobotics.com website it seems they are not selling or promoting any products except scientific research to Pentagon so intention on Wikipedia is solely for information on advancement in fields such as robotics. Removal of this article would be a loss to Wikipedia readers since similar defense companies would otherwise not be able to disclose really advanced research progress due to military secrecy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Divergenes (talk • contribs) 07:36, 29 April 2018 (UTC) — Divergenes (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * We are looking forward to you responding to the COI notices on your talk page. Jytdog (talk) 08:06, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Entirely promotional, no indications of notability. Fails GNG and WP:NCORP. I've also nominated Bhargav Gajjar] for deletion. Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion.  HighKing++ 21:51, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Company Vishwa Robotics has been subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable news articles that are independent of each other such as Scientific American, Popular Mechanics as shown on Wikipedia and other sites. This is a wikipedia measure of notability.Divergenes (talk) 23:29, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The only Scientific American reference I could find is this guest blog post written by Michael Lombardi - same guy who wrote the guest blog post on Vishwa for National Geographic (but fails WP:RS because it is a Blog). The Popular Mechanics article says the source is Scientific American and that article fails WP:RS. So again, nothing that meets the criteria for establishing notability.  HighKing++ 09:20, 30 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete company fails the new WP:NCORP guidelines and specifically WP:CORPDEPTH. No source indicates the notability of the company or why it is significant among similar robotics companies. Articles like mention the company and concern the company's product but do not provide an in-depth view of the company or its operations.--SamHolt6 (talk) 00:31, 30 April 2018 (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.