Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Insinia

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. – bradv🍁 06:57, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Insinia

[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)

A bit unsure about this one. On one hand, the company's and/or the founder's main claim to fame is their Twitter hack, which was indeed well covered by UK media at the time. That seems like WP:ONEEVENT, though, and possibly WP:ILLCON. Other than that, I think this fails WP:CORPDEPTH / WP:GNG. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:15, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The company passes the notability requirements in line with WP:CORP. A News Search turned up plenty of results about the company from independent news sources. I appreciate that the article needs to be refined to more appropriate wiki tone.
- Thank you, IP editor (with no edit history other than this AfD...), for pointing out that there are "plenty of results" — would you like to share any of them with us? PS: Please don't edit or delete the comments of others, thanks! --DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:41, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:25, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:25, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:25, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 13:48, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:52, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Third time is the charm. It would be great if we could get some thoughts here before we close.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 00:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* 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. None of the references in the article meet the criteria and having searched I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria. Topic fails GNG/WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 18:15, 13 December 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.