Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vimosure

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:46, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vimosure (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)

Overall looks and sounds like WP:promo. I don't really see why it would meet WP:GNG guidelines either. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 04:23, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 04:23, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:36, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:37, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:37, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:37, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:39, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Entirely promotional in nature but also fails notability criteria. This is a product/service therefore NCORP guidelines apply. I'm assuming all the sources are reliable and the publishers are corporately independent from the topic organization - but there's more requirements than that for establishing notability. WP:NCORP requires multiple sources (at least two) of deep or significant coverage with in-depth information *on the product/service* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "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. Not a single reference either mentioned above or in the article meet the criteria. Topic fails WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 20:39, 13 February 2022 (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.