Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SeeVolution (2nd nomination)

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!} 02:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SeeVolution (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 the notability guideline for companies. Sources are trivial (routine funding announcements), non-independent or unreliable. Originally PRODed, but missed this previous AfD which unanimously favoured deletion. – Teratix ₵ 03:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, Websites, and California. – Teratix ₵ 03:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "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. Fails AfD in 2012 and still fails today. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 15:05, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Did do a quick BEFORE anyway (and I really do mean quick, there were only 2 google news results, for example, and one of them was about a different topic, as are the hits in scholarly sources, nothing relevant in books, TWL databases don't have anything relevant that aren't press releases, etc). I do see some of their products were acquired by Bridgeline Digital, which is a listed company that we might have been able to redirect to if not for the fact that that company doesn't have an article right now. I don't think a previous deletion via AFD should block a PROD (for recreations that are not G4) though to be honest I'm inclined to speedy delete via A7 for this one, I can't see any plausible CCSI. Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:28, 1 June 2024 (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.