Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AlphaSense: Difference between revisions

AlphaSense (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:SIRS. Routine coverage, PR and press-release based refs. scope_creep^Talk 00:10, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Per reasons by nominator (scope creep). The article does not carry enough significance to be created. Timothytyy (talk) 00:31, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and New York. Shellwood (talk) 08:18, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment A look at the references. Ref 1 to 5,7 is funding news. Ref 6 is a graphics that doesn't convey much information,

• Ref 7 "Last week, AlphaSense announced that it had received an additional $50 million in funding" Funding news.
• Ref 8 "AlphaSense Acquires Stream by Mosaic" links to [1] stating "Using AlphaSense’s market-leading AI search technology, Stream customers can now rapidly find key business insights within thousands of unique expert interviews, gaining new perspectives on companies across a breadth of industries". This is podcast as press-release. It fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:SIRS.
• Ref 9 "AlphaSense Merges with Sentieo" Routine business news failing WP:CORPDEPTH.
• Ref 10 "AlphaSense offers a financial search engine that helps analysts and portfolio managers find info that's buried in dense text documents, "whether the information is in page 200 of an SEC filing footnote, or a broker research report, a piece of news or conference transcript," says Jack Kokko, CEO of the vendor" A single paragraph they use its search engine technology to search for investment idea. Fails WP:SIRS. Not in-depth and no significant.
• Ref 11 A three-line paragraph. Fails WP:SIRS.WP:CORPDEPTH. Single subject. Fails WP:ORGCRIT
• Ref 12 A three-line paragraph with diagram copied from the website. Fails WP:SIRS, WP:CORPDEPTH. Fails WP:ORGCRIT

As a company its not notable. scope_creep^Talk 09:42, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per source analysis above. I'm not seeing much else to use for GNG either. Oaktree b (talk) 18:53, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - What search engine are you using? I looked for three seconds on Firefox and found nice long significant coverage on TechCrunch. This is a billion dollar company. All sources are independent and reliable. Some are in-depth and yes some are also brief, but they are all important in the context of the article. You'll notice that everything is sourced. Few articles can say that. I'll find some more good sources and add them after I finish watching my team. I don't understand how with 3.5 million articles on Wikipedia why this one was targeted. Might it be because the nom was accused of being a serial targeter at another AfD when he didn't do a reasonable WP:BEFORE, and he took the bait? He was blocked in the past for similar behavior, when he admitted he lost his cool. And the weight of the grammatically odd delete vote of the three month old account with the non-native English speaker has to be questioned as well. This is a familiar pattern with this nom, and his disruptive behaviour is being enabled, to the detriment of the encyclopedia's business content. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:16, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of trying to revert me, why not just not be abusive? TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:39, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, User:Timtempleton, coverage of valuations, product launches, funding announcements etc, such as the TechCrunch article, are considered to be routine coverage per WP:CORPDEPTH, and as such do not contribute to notability. All coverage I could find from a search was of this nature. Devonian Wombat (talk) 01:38, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You’re absolutely wrong. And I will hold my entire hundreds of AFD and hundreds of article creation history against yours. This has to stop at some point. You are doing a huge disservice to business coverage on Wikipedia. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 02:48, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]