Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BreezoMeter

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. Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:33, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BreezoMeter

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

Non notable startup article, full of PR,social media links as references. No indication of notability. Article is also written poorly that contains trivial information like their play store app and also general fundraising info. Contains a long list of non notable awards which should not be added per WP:ORGAWARDS Mar11 (talk) 17:28, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Mar11 (talk) 17:29, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Mar11 (talk) 17:29, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. Mar11 (talk) 17:29, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 17:38, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The sourcing and look of the newly created article is atrocious. And the vast majority of startups at this stage are not notable. However, this one is. Passing mention in this book - [1]. About 10+ references in journal/conference papers - [2]. Some pretty wide (and multi-language) news coverage - e.g. [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23].Icewhiz (talk) 20:02, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a new article that must be improve, but the company is notable as can be seen in the new references, it is also in the same status as many other companies in Category:Companies established in 2014 that were approved. Bambiker (talk) 11:34, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:22, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I've checked the references listed above and the ones in the article. None of the references meet the criteria for establishing notability. The book reference above is a passing-mention and therefore fails WP:CORPDEPTH. Likewise, the conference papers are passings-in-mention and fail WP:CORPDEPTH. The news coverage looked promising but I cannot find one that meets the criteria for establishing notability. Many rely on interviews/quotations from company sources and those references therefore fail WP:ORGIND. Others list the company in a list of other companies or mention the Breezomoter API being used to power other apps and fail WP:CORPDEPTH. It may just be WP:TOOSOON. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:44, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This seems very borderline. A lot of sources are company press releases, however, those are also largely minor points of contention. The meat of the article is sourced to things like CNBC and Haaretz, though in those cases I question CORPDEPTH. DocumentError (talk) 01:45, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- non notable; sources provided are passing mentions and / or WP:SPIP. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH & WP:TOOSOON. Just self-promotion, which Wikipedia is not a suitable venue for. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:24, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Not notable for stand alone article at this point. Kierzek (talk) 17:11, 11 January 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.