Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nexla

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

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. Clear consensus for deletion. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:56, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nexla

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

Non-notable tiny tech company, with no credible assertion of notability; only going to AfD process as act of courtesy to User:SoWhy, who feels it does not quite meet A7 speedy deletion standards. Orange Mike | Talk 23:04, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 23:50, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 23:50, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing but commercial blurb WP:Promo. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:58, 20 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Added more notable references, please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nexla — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gokodogo (talk • contribs) 01:17, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, but neither of those are notable; they seem to be some kind of ribbons at non-notable trade shows or something. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:52, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: An article on a start-up firm, noting its fundraising and involvement in a couple of start-up competitions. The May 2017 TechCrunch article is the nearest to an independent source, but is doing little more than summarising a propositional presentation. I am not seeing sufficient for WP:CORPDEPTH or WP:GNG; at best, this is WP:TOOSOON for encyclopaedic notability. AllyD (talk) 06:35, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-notable start-up, nowhere near meeting WP:CORP. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 07:54, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The subject for this article is not notable and the article may appear to be for promotional use. Bmbaker88 (talk) 12:52, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:CORPDEPTH. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:39, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and GNG. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 17:37, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-notable. Deathlibrarian (talk) 12:24, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete agree with the above. Insufficiently notable. Pichpich (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2017 (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.