Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KISI

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. ~ mazca ^talk 01:05, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

KISI

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

A directory-like listing for an early-stage tech startup. Significant RS coverage not found. Sources are hyper-local, WP:SPIP and / or routine funding news. Has raised $1.5M in venture funding which is a strong indicator that it's WP:TOOSOON for an encyclopedia entry. A different version of the article has been previously deleted via PROD. Does not meet WP:NCORP / WP:CORPDEPTH. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:17, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:49, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:49, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: An article about a company supported by typical start-up coverage about the firm's aspirations and funding. There is a recent review of their product [1] but neither that nor anything else foudn in searches indicates that the firm has achieved notability. AllyD (talk) 07:18, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This recent market report from 2017 lists the company among Cisco, Microsoft. All other companies in the report have pages, why not this one [2]? B3rn1b01 17:39, 16 May 2018 (UTC)— B3rn1b01 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- Response Not only does the report appear to fail as a reliable source, it definitely fails the higher standard for establishing notabilty. See below. HighKing⁺⁺10:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
delete typical thin page for a company abusing WP for promotion. Not a WP article. Fails WP:NCORP Jytdog (talk) 00:08, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete'. With respect to the comment above by B3rn1b01 (talk · contribs), PR Newswire pieces are press releases and invalid for assessing notability. Also, WP:OTHERSTUFF that exists on Wikipedia has no bearing on this article. Bottom line, notability for KISI has not been established. Per WP:CORPDEPTH, we need in-depth coverage of the company from reliable sources that are independent of the company. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:09, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Although a Keep !voter above points to this report by "ReportLinker", there is nothing to indicate who wrote the report and Reportlinker, the company, does not attribute either itself, or a reputable research company, as authors of the piece. As such, based on what I can find, it cannot be considered reliable much less as meeting the criteria for establishing notability. In fact, nothing in the article provides any reasons or indications as to notability. Another run-of-the-mill early-stage technology company. Fails GNG and WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺20:51, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete . This is the classic attitude of startups thinking they can gain notability by using Wikipedia as a B2B platform. WP:NOTDIR. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:45, 19 May 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.