Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inxeption (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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:29, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Inxeption

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Pr type sources, routine announcements. Fails WP:SIGCOV. Was soft deleted last month with the article more or less being the same as it was then THEFlint Shrubwood (talk) 21:08, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. " Page includes WP:SECONDARY Articles from magazines, journals, and newspapers from various individual writers own interpretation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bird4116 (talk • contribs) 22:52, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:36, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:36, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:36, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:36, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:37, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: If this was re-created not via WP:REFUND and using the deleted content content without a WP:RFHM then we may have a WP:COPYVIO due to loss of attribution history.Djm-leighpark (talk) 10:11, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This was created by the same person as the original page, so is only a copyright violation if it incorporates further content written by others, and any admin can easily fix that by merging histories. Let's discuss notability rather than get side-tracked into an issue that is easily fixed, if it even exists. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:46, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ... you can see that ... I can't .. but you've confirmed no issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djm-leighpark (talk • contribs)

Delete. I do not believe that this company passes WP:CORP. The sources in the article, and that I can find, all seem to be press-release-generated routine coverage in niche blockchain and tech startup publications. Phil Bridger (talk) 11:33, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete: (on balance) People wanting to keep (and me!) should ensure they've signed and read WP:THREE. The first three cites supported the current claims in the first sentence appear to be press releases. Demery, Paul (currently 4th) may be a candidate for notability. Various others lead to press releases and on some the cites are not suitably embellished with e.g. ad 'id' to lead me to the relevant part of the article. Might be WP:TOOSOON, not helped by oozing blockchain everywhere(though perhaps a good application of it), and I've not rigorously checked every reference - Burnson then Garrity might be the next best. The summary Added new information on didn't help me understand what was new as I have not baseline. Too hard to look further.Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:13, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: MeetsWP:THREE. "Demery, Paul" (now 1st), Burnson, Petersson, Benton, and Garrity may be candidates for notability. I'm not familiar with the other coverage Aesop4000 (talk) 18:50, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All of those sources are obviously based on press releases, complete with quotes from the people involved. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:30, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checkuser note: sock vote struck. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:44, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Seems to have hope. Benleg4000 (talk) 18:48, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What hope? Phil Bridger (talk) 19:30, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom; press release cryptocoin startup routine WP:NOT and a bunch of other stuff ☆ Bri (talk) 16:25, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Farzad Dibachi - Epinoia (talk) 04:12, 7 May 2019 (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.