Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yieldify


 * 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. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 21:28, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Yieldify

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A directory-like listing for an on an unremarkable private company. Significant RS coverage not found. What comes up is interviews, passing mentions, WP:SPIP, and other sources otherwise not suitable for notability. Has raised $6 million in venture funding, which strongly suggests it's WP:TOOSOON for an article. The legal matter involves an equally non-notable Bounce Exchange, an article on which has been deleted here: Articles for deletion/Bounce Exchange. Fails WP:NCORP / WP:CORPDEPTH. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:05, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  Every morning   (there's a halo...)  04:34, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  Every morning   (there's a halo...)  04:34, 29 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete: An article predominantly about routine announcements, funding and IP claims / counter-claims. The Parmy Olson item may be the best of the references and does contain some discussion of the business, such as its work on the Marks and Spencer website. However, I don't think encyclopaedic notability is demonstrated by that, or by IP disputes, or by the various awards listed: inclusion of a co-founder in a 10-under-30 list, an award at an industry ceremony (where the firm also sponsored one of the other awards), or inclusion of the firm in a fastest-growing list. A company going about its business, but not enough for WP:CORPDEPTH or WP:GNG. AllyD (talk) 07:10, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - Very close, but falls short of WP:CORPDEPTH IMHO. Once you take out the routine announcements - most of which are about funding - you are left with Fortune and Business Insider. Note that the Business Insider piece is one of many that talk about it stealing code so I included all of those as a single source instead of multiple. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:23, 30 March 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.