Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inside-Cap

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:37, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Inside-Cap (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. Except for this which might be WP:SIGCOV and WP:RS though I'm unsure due to the language barrier, the rest are either non-independent (from the company itself), non-SIGCOV routine announcements, or non-RS blogs. A WP:BEFORE search found routine announcements/news columns, blogs, shopping sites, and trivial mentions, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, but none of these contribute to WP:NCORP as they are not significant coverage. VickKiang (talk) 21:15, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 08:14, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:50, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - can't find enough coverage to show it passes WP:GNG or WP:CORPDEPTH.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:25, 7 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.