Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alphacet

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:32, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alphacet

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

This company is not notable and may not even exist any more. SupremeWikiOverfiend (talk) 16:42, 12 January 2017 (UTC) Sorry I need some kind person to tag if for me due to crappy computer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SupremeWikiOverfiend (talk • contribs) 16:46, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:17, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:17, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Notability is not temporary, a company that no longer exists can still be notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:41, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 18:18, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:PROMO; the article is too promotional to consider keeping. Sample content:

"Alpha generation platforms have been receiving increased attention as automated trading continues to grow within many key markets. According to the Aite Group, 30% of all European and U.S. stock trades were driven by automatic programs in 2006, and they predict that by 2010, 50% of all U.S. stock trades will be run by automatic programs.

This is pure "marketing brochure" speak. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:05, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a clear business listing sourced by business announcements and their own websites, WP:NOT applies. SwisterTwister talk 19:01, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is nothing notable about this company - not its size, products, innovation, people who work there... nothing. With apologies to whoever created the page and the people who work at the company, this page doesn't belong in an encyclopedia.

Ira Leviton (talk) 13:13, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This belongs to brochures which Wikipedia is WP:NOT. A search online for any other sources doesn't yield much. Xaxing (talk) 14:50, 26 January 2017 (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.