Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coseer

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. Unanimous consensus to delete, modulo the article's author. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:06, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Coseer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Non-notable startup, created by an SPA that added spam links about the company around the encyclopedia in an attempt to promote it. The coverage of this article is your standard startup press coverage: non-notable awards, one-liners mentioning its use, coverage on industry blogs, and listings of products. These either don't meet the coverage expected under WP:CORPDEPTH or excluded as counting towards notability by WP:SPIP. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:57, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:36, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:37, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This is textbook WP:SPAM masquerading as an article. shoy (reactions) 17:17, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:03, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Is "Write yourself a WP article" now part of the standard start-up checklist, along with registering a domain and printing business cards? Andy Dingley (talk) 09:11, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unfortunately, it seems so. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:20, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Coseer is an established startup in the cognitive computing space, and has garnered enough real press coverage over the past five years to be considered notable. Current citations reference credible third party publications. A google search also reveals many third party links that have not yet been added to the page, including the following: https://www.citrix.com/blogs/2015/02/09/michael-harries/ http://www.govtech.com/civic/GSA-Hackathon-Sought-Tangible-AI-Solutions-for-Making-Government-Data-Accessible-Via-Personal-Assistant.html http://www.kmworld.com/Articles/Editorial/Features/ECM-preparing-for-the-future-111271.aspx https://www.techemergence.com/how-cognitive-computing-can-change-the-nature-of-business-operations-a-conversation-with-praful-krishna/ https://www.ceocfointerviews.com/interviews/Coseer16.htm The founder is a regular on the AI conference circuit. There is no funding information, but that should not be a criterion for notability. CognitiveAI (talk) 04:50, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • For anyone else who comes along: the first source provided is a company blog. The second source is a mention in an article about someone else and then a quote from an employee. The third source I can't access (doesn't give a valid page). The fourth is a podcast interview with the employee of the company, so its a non-independent primary source. The fifth is an interview with CEO/CFO magazine with the CEO, which again, is a non-independent primary source. This is the type of coverage this startup receives, and like all other startups that receive virtually identical types of coverage, it does not amount to notability under WP:N when the guideline is read as a whole. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:57, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Original references in the article are all reputable third party sources. They do have quotes and interviews from the founder, but are still independent, and difficult for the startup to sway. http://thesiliconreview.com/magazines/magazine_profile.php?id=82 - http://cfi.co/awards/north-america/2017/coseer-best-intelligent-workflow-technology-united-states-2016/ - https://cognitive-solutions.cioreview.com/vendor/2017/coseer - Pasting the links from KMWorld below again. They can also be accessed by going to Kmworld.com and searching Coseer. http://www.kmworld.com/Articles/Editorial/Features/ECM-preparing-for-the-future-111271.aspx - http://www.kmworld.com/Articles/Editorial/Features/Text-analytics-and-beyond-111925.aspx?PageNum=2 - http://www.kmworld.com/Articles/Editorial/Features/KM-and-the-environment---Water-management-uses-analytics-big-data-and-collaboration-to-handle-complexity.-118371.aspx?PageNum=3 - Visit https://coseer.com/blog/category/events-and-mentions/, which catalogs the startup's press coverage and events. There are 27 different entries, way more coverage than a non-notable startup would receive. Assuming this is a bootstrapped startup, the amount of coverage generated is reasonably significant. CognitiveAI (talk) 16:26, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment They may very well be reputable third party sources, but the articles themselves are not intellectually independent as they rely almost entirely on company-produced material or quotations from company sources. The references therefore fail the criteria for establishing notability and fail WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. Find a reference that doesn't rely on quotations from company officers or material provided/published by the company. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 14:53, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails GNG, references fails WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 14:53, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The coverage of Coseer meets the following criteria as per WP:CORPDEPTH... Coverage in each of the links provided above is substantial - Multiple independent sources have chosen to cover Coseer. The sources have independently judged that Coseer should be awarded Best Cognitive Computing company, Best Intelligent Workflow Technology, and 50 Fastest Growing Companies, among others. - One of the publications goes to the extent of featuring Coseer’s founder on the cover page along with IBM Watson, the preeminent Cognitive Computing solution: https://cognitive-solutions.cioreview.com/Rank_subcat_images/9cn1lpage.jpg - Evidence has already been presented in previous comments about Coseer's work being used in enterprises as well as the US government since its founding in 2012, and the substantial volume of independent coverage Coseer has received. CognitiveAI (talk) 02:39, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • • Response I requested that you find references that do not rely on quotations from company officers or material provided/published by the company in order to safely meet the criteria for establishing notability - specifically WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. References must be intellectually independent in order to meet the criteria for establishing independence. Articles that extensively quote an interview with founders or company officers are not intellectually independent and are regarded as PRIMARY sources since all the facts and information is being relayed by the company or its officers. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 10:19, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note to Closer This is the second !vote from this editor as this editor has already !voted above.
  • Sorry, my second vote was an error, please ignore. CognitiveAI (talk) 14:39, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've struck your second !vote for clarity. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 14:57, 23 August 2017 (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.