Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BrightView

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:26, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BrightView (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)

I am not able to find coverage to satisfy WP:CORP. Coverage in the article is either routine (IPOs, acquistions) or in trade publications which aren't of use for determining notability. My searches did not turn up anything better. SmartSE (talk) 22:40, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. SmartSE (talk) 22:40, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:57, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - The sources are all about funding, acquisitions, or structural changes (e.g., looking for a new CEO), all of which are routine, trivial mentions. Article fails WP:GNG as it lacks any third-party reliable sources with any significant coverage of the subject, and fails WP:NCORP outright. - Aoidh (talk) 23:11, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete As per nomination. MrsSnoozyTurtle 01:51, 13 November 2022 (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.