Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AnaSpec (2nd nomination)

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:11, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AnaSpec

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability, largely unreferenced, promotional. A Google News search brought up quite a few hits, but none that seemed to cover the company in appreciable detail. Apparently the page survived a deletion discussion in 2008, but the basic issues have not been addressed; of the given sources, one is a press release, one is written by company staff, The Scientist is a passing mention. So we're left with, at most, one good source (hidden behind a paywall, so I can't see just how good it is); that's not enough to satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH. Huon (talk) 01:03, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 03:26, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 03:26, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 03:26, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for the reasons listed by Huon. Moaz786 (talk to me or see what I've been doing) 16:47, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Seems to pretty squarely fail WP:CORPDEPTH. Kingofaces43 (talk) 05:29, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. New coverage appears to be routine or to be in niche publications. As others have noted, a depth of coverage (per WP:CORPDEPTH) isn't established by the references. TimBuck2 (talk) 13:17, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with OP, fails WP:NCORP and GNG. HighKing⁺⁺17:45, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.