Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V-NOVA

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 no consensus. After extended times for discussion, there is a clear absence of consensus (and no particular interest in deletion beyond that of the nominator). BD2412 T 03:52, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

V-NOVA

[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)

Fails to pass WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. No credible third-party citations are available to support WP:SIGCOV. Hence, calling for an AfD discussion. Hatchens (talk) 03:00, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Hatchens (talk) 03:00, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The creator of this article is User:Randfiskin is also involved in launching (trying to work up on) non-notable wiki pages in a very short period, Cyber Peace Foundation (CPF), Vogue Institute of Art & Design and Draft:Vibhav Kant Upadhyay which have been earlier either deleted or moved to draft space for various reasons. Though the ID itself was made in 2017, it went active on July 1, 2020, by performing its first edit at Juli Berwald's page. As per my basic understanding, this ID is probably involved in "Paid Edits/WP:PAID" without disclosure. Kindly note, due diligence is required. (Similar comment has been added to the other AfDs) -Hatchens (talk) 03:02, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: All the claims are baseless and there is no evidence of paid. Note this account is created in March 2020 and the user is only interested to deleting the articles no matter whether it is notable or not you may check the history.

Special Note: This user is attacking the articles and playing with good articles. Most of his nominations are false and saved as "Keep" or "Speedy Keep". Such as IILM Institute for Higher Education, Care Hospitals, Krishna Shankar, Ansal University, Radio Mango, Zambar Restaurent, Baseer Ali, Liam Brennan, Dinesh Parmar, Biplob, Rachel Goenka, Pramati Technologies, Sayantani Guhathakurta, Shivin Narang, Artech, Audrish Banerjee, and there is a long list of "Keep" result. This account must be blocked immediately. He is destroying good articles on Wikipedia. Randfiskin (talk) 05:39, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: @Randfiskin, your allegation is duly accepted. If an article passes the AfD on its merit, then well and good. If not, then it gets deleted as per the consensus. That's why I have initiated this AfD discussion. Let everyone chip in and let the sanity prevail. (Same comment has been added to other two AfD nominations - Cyber Peace Foundation and Vogue Institute of Art & Design). -Hatchens (talk) 06:04, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

KeepThe company has enough citations on reliable resources. Bagged many notable awards for many consecutive years. Clearly Passes WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. Randfiskin (talk) 05:54, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Kindly do note, this Keep vote, is added by the creator of this article. -Hatchens (talk) 06:04, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Again baseless comment which has no meaning. While creator has rights to vote or comment on his own article. This is the same comment posted on all other discussion.Randfiskin (talk) 06:09, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Dear Randfiskin, this comment is for those who will chip in their views. It is not meant to stop you but to notify others. Don't be aggressive. Kindly, stay calm and participate in this AfD discussion freely. -Hatchens (talk) 06:19, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Well I am unable to sort out the notability question at this point, it's pretty there's something off about both of you and you obviously have a problem with each other that needs to to be worked out. I could really go either way with a lot of these myself, but I don't want to feed into either one of you by voting and I don't think anyone else should either. Maybe these nominations should be put on hold for and you should take it to ANI, because I don't think this is the place to litigate your personal issues. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:18, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Special Note: The creator of this article has notified the nominator of this AfD to WP:ANB. Kindly follow that parallel discussion by clicking here. -Hatchens (talk) 03:16, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:51, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question @Hatchens: could you go into more detail as to how coverage on sites like BBC, Financial Times, and Wired (Italian) fail to satisfy notability? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 02:54, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Rhododendrites... for asking this question. As you have correctly mentioned, the entity has been duly covered in the following media portals - BBC, FT, and Wired. All three sources are good to go as per WP:ELPEREN. But, now comes another angle... all these news coverages followed a particular timeline pattern and that is - April 1 to 10, 2015. Before and after (this time range), there is no single credible coverage concerning this entity, which proves that these particular 3 media sources are part of their coordinated PR Campaign.

You can consider my views as mere speculation, but why I'm confident? - just check the FT link, - "Produced by Aimee Keane. Filmed by Petros Gioumpasis". Kindly note, both of them are not the mainstream FT journalists they are audio-visual producers working specifically for FT's brand solution unit (for confirmation, you can check their profiles at Linkedin). -Hatchens (talk) 03:48, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:13, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:14, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I dislike the article and believe it needs to be cleaned up substantially. I see WP:CITEKILL and WP:BOMBARD, and see it as borderline WP:ADMASQ, but I have checked the first eight references. I find sufficient in them that notability is verified despite my distaste. AfD is not a matter of taste, I fear, nor is it a cleanup venue. Fiddle Faddle 11:08, 14 August 2020 (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.