Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mind Riders Tech

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. Giving SPA votes less weight Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:24, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mind Riders Tech

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

Insufficient reliable sources as evidence of notability. A brief look for English language sources didnt uncover better quality sources than those used on the article. Perhaps there are better sources in local languages. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 11:07, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 11:42, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 11:43, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 11:43, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 11:44, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and draft and userfy if needed as I see no obvious signs of improvement. SwisterTwister talk 05:26, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(Keep) References are reliable and uniquely identified a source of information such as Indian news named "Kohraam News". Content has been written as per NPO representing fairly, proportionately. Kate A. Steel (talk) 16:10, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Looks like notable. Draft written according to neutral point of view and one of the source materials is verifiable from online news in India "Kohraam". Salamuddin A. Shaikh (talk) 16:18, 20 October 2015 (UTC)— Salamuddin A. Shaikh (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Getting back to !votes actually based on policy, rather than opinion, Delete. Not a single (nada, zilch) hit on News, Newspapers, Books, Scholar, Highbeam or JSTOR. Absolutely fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:55, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 09:53, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Added some game which are developed by Mind Riders Tech. Keep: Now, It looks notable. Kate A. Steel (talk) 05:10, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You already gave your opinion as "keep" above - please note that while it's fine to add more than one comment to this discussion, each user should only add one "vote" (such as keep or delete). --bonadea contributions talk 14:56, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:CORPDEPTH ; of the five references currently in the article, four are primary sources including press releases and the CEO's own website, and the fifth one looks like a rewrite of a press release so that's essentially primary as well. --bonadea contributions talk 14:56, 30 October 2015 (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.