Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inbox Business Technologies

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. Discarding the canvassed (UPE?), non-P&G views, we're left with a rough consensus to delete. Owen× ☎ 20:13, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inbox Business Technologies (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Wikipedia is not a platform for corporate advertisements. This is related to Ghias Khan paid-for-spam. IPO of this company didn't happen so WP:LISTED is not applicable. Other than that there are routine press releases or brief coverage in WP:TRADES. Fails WP:NCORP. DeploreJames (talk) 11:01, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 16:19, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: @DeploreJames, Do you have any evidence to support the claim that the Ghias Ali BLP ispaid-for-spam or are these just allegations? Regardless, the focus should be on removing promotional content per WP:ATD rather than seeking deletion. Also, you should notify the page creator @Crosji: on their tp about this AFD. PS. declare your master sock account, please. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:44, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep it @Saqib Inbox, plays a significant role in Pakistan's IT sector. However, I've noticed that the article has been gradually shortened over the past few weeks. While changes are healthy, it's clear that anonymous users have removed entire sections, and after suggesting AFD, sourced content has been removed to further weaken it. Given the company's recent media presence (here, here, here and here), I recommend updating the article and ensuring its preservation. Insofar, I would suggest to keep it. @DeploreJames is your account only focusing on Pakistan to delete articles? Crosji (talk) 09:49, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Can you point to sources which you believe meet GNG/WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability? You've pointed to 4 sources but this in Tribune is about the company being warned to pay minimum wage but has no in-depth information about the company, this is in Techjuice which does not appear to meet the criteria for a [[WP:RS|reliable source] as it has no "about" page and may not have any editorial control - in other words it is a type of news blog, this in The News is a mere mention in passing because one of the directors was being written about in a totally different context, and this in the Tribune is a single sentence about a company announcement. "Media presence" is not one of the criteria for establishing notability, rather the content must meet GNG/NCORP criteria. HighKing⁺⁺ 15:04, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment: @HighKing I came across this link to an article that discusses a notable aspect of their business, specifically their "web monitoring system"), which is central of this story. This may clarify why it's challenging to find many sources. Additionally, I found another reference, though it's a bit out-dated, that also highlights the company's significance. Crosji (talk) 17:33, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Response Crosji, the article in Dawn mentions the 2nd article and paraphrases it without adding anything extra about the company, so as a source in its own right (for the purposes of establishing notability) it can be ignored. Looking then at the article in Coda, it says that the topic company has partnered with a Canadian company to provide a solution to monitor web and call traffic. The article only says that the topic company were licensed to install the Canadian company's technology. It attributes the technology enabling "web monitoring" to the Canadian technology, not that of the topic company. But of more relevance to here, there is insufficient in-depth information provided about the *company* in this article, and it fails WP:CORPDEPTH. As to this in The Express Tribune, it is a regurgitated announcement of the company receiving an industry award, the same story carried on the same day in several other publications such as here and here and here. It is not "Independent Content" and fails ORGIND. HighKing⁺⁺ 18:06, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Computing, and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:09, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. While I agree with @Saqib to avoid WP:Popularage, this article is consistent with WP guidelines of WP:NPOV, WP:RS. It also does not fail WP:NCORP as the primary criteria for WP:ORG is “A company, corporation, organization, group, product, or service is presumed notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." Faraz.salim (talk) 11:36, 22 August 2024 (UTC) — Faraz.salim (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

• Comment Welcome back after an absence of 10 years to !vote at this AfD. Can you perhaps point to any sources that meet GNG/NCORP criteria for establishing notability? HighKing⁺⁺ 15:04, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete fails WP:CORPDEPTH / WP:SIRS. 188.31.32.162 (talk) 20:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 15:04, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Routine funding announcements, leadership changes, republished press releases, etc. all do not count towards WP:NCORP notability. Don't see much in-depth coverage about the company. C F A 💬 17:54, 26 August 2024 (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.