Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dedaub LTD
: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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 22:11, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
=[[:Dedaub LTD]]=
:{{la|1=Dedaub LTD}} – (
:({{Find sources AFD|title=Dedaub LTD}})
No evidence of notability per WP:NCORP. All sources I could find are trivial mentions. C F A 💬 22:40, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, Finance, Companies, and Technology. C F A 💬 22:41, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Malta. • Gene93k (talk) 00:01, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: I see the page's history, initially the page had few references. But, some editor came and added too many references and moved the page. The references are actually not spamy. But, later an admin has removed about 10 references with an opinion of ineligible references. Assuming the admin is right, the subject has no more mentions in other reliable references. So, it does not pass the notability requirement Bauyosad (talk) 11:32, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Most of the sources in the article are not about the company - some merely namecheck one of the founders (e.g. the ACM conference in which Smaragdakis was a co-chair). The only source I see substantially about the company (and which is also in the article) is the Times of Malta. Search does not provide anything more. Lamona (talk) 02:57, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- 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++ 15:21, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Unconvincing in terms of notability and SIGCOV. Baygora (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:43, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
{{clear}}
: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.