Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vumero


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 05:47, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Vumero

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Claims of significance are not supported by listed citations WP:CCOS. Cited sources for claims are materials produced by the organization itself, and I can find no outside reference to the claims online. Pure RED &#124;  talk to me   &#124; 21:29, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

In the interest of transparency, I originally nominated this article as a CSD-A7 but it was declined. Pure RED &#124;  talk to me   &#124; 21:31, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:47, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:47, 8 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Weak delete: I believe I was correct in declining A7, because there are multiple credible claims of significance (has received coverage for pioneering professional services education with world championships events, owns the largest Sports Analytics & Sports Technology Conference series in the world, awarded as one of the fastest growing startup companies in Australia) in the article. Said claims need not be supported by reliable sources to disqualify the article from A7 per WP:CCOS. There are few sources available, however, and they all appear to be primary sources or promotional. These appear to be secondary sources: . Companies and organisations are not my area of expertise and I don't know if the coverage given by these sources is "significant", but I am willing to re-assess my position if more reliable secondary sources are provided. Linguist un Eins uno 14:05, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * To clarify, I'm not stating that I disagree with the denial of CS7. I agree that I mis-tagged it based off the criteria listed. Just want to make it clear that I was the one who tagged it. Pure RED  &#124;  talk to me   &#124; 01:27, 10 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete: ITWire is sponsored. YBF does not appear to be independent (it's a coworking space for startups, etc, which has hosted the company). Launchvic does not demonstrate notability (it looks basically like a government f[o]unded angel investor), and the page does not mention the company or its founders. The rest of the sources are primary. I'd accept notability on an NPOINTS basis for their range of activities (doing things, attracting thousands of participants, ...), but I'm not finding indications of in-depth sustained coverage in independent RS for anything, and specifically not at AFR.com (ft, wsj...). ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 11:45, 15 September 2017 (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.