Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/DotComGuy (company) - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

350:
are not intellectually independent enough, then I can see your point. Just looking for clarification on the principles because when I submitted this article I believed that we met WP:NCORP because I cited multiple independent sources and that is the only requirement I see in WP:NCORP. I see no definition nor requirement of "intellectual independence" nor "depth" in WP:NCORP, so I do not think it is fair to assess that these sources "clearly fail the independence criteria".
219:
activities of The DotComGuy (person) and the subsequent branding of the DotComGuy company, going back (as of 1/9/2018) 18 years, providing it with a basis for notability both as a documentation of the history of the evolution of the DotComGuy brand (first as a person, then as a company that purchased the brand) and as a company in its own right.
261:. We normally require multiple reliable sources intellectually independent from the company that discuss the company in some depth. Both sources present in the article clearly fail the independence criterion. Unless better sources can be found, the article is likely to be deleted. Also, please be mindful of our 349:
because there are multiple reliable sources that are independent from the company. I do see your point about depth, however I believe at around 750 words the Sun Current article does offer some depth, though if your point is that any articles that involve interviewing a representative of the company
218:
I believe this article meets the criteria for inclusion on the basis of its reliably referenced content and notability. There are two citations from reputable news sources about this company and its activities and the article is written in a neutral way. Additionally, its history evolves out of the
224:
With regards to the assertion that there is a lack of substantial third-party coverage, I would challenge where the line should be drawn to define whether third-party coverage is substantial or not - what is the established criteria for defining what is and is not substantial? If evidence can be
225:
presented as to what the established norm within the Knowledge (XXG) community is to define substantial, then I agree that this is or is not substantial in accordance with whatever that established norm is, however I have been unable to find any documentation of what constitutes substantial.
344:
What aspect makes the existing sources not independent? These organizations are both independent news organizations. Is it because they are interviewing DotComGuy representatives? I believe this does meet the cited criteria in
163: 213:
I apologize if I posted my feedback on the wrong page. I thought I had to add it to the article's talk page - I didn't realize there was another talk page specifically for the discussion of deletion.
116: 157: 325: 283: 297: 311: 123: 89: 84: 93: 76: 365: 240: 178: 17: 145: 198:
by a wide margin due to lack of substantial third-party coverage. Not to be confused with the person having the same name.
471: 412: 139: 541: 40: 449:-- the company has not achieved anything significant just yet. Sources listed in the article are local, not meeting 135: 522: 505: 486: 462: 427: 399: 369: 331: 317: 303: 289: 274: 244: 207: 58: 258: 185: 80: 501: 353: 228: 361: 236: 442: 382:
Interviews do not normally contribute to the notability of a company since they are primary sources. See
72: 64: 537: 482: 458: 423: 257:. The DotComGuy person is covered in another article and does not confer notability on your company per 54: 36: 151: 446: 171: 383: 497: 438: 346: 254: 195: 395: 377: 357: 270: 250: 232: 203: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
536:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
518: 454: 450: 262: 388:
other works in which the company, corporation, organization, or group talks about itself
496:. I don't see the significant third party coverage needed to be regarded as notable. 391: 341: 266: 199: 110: 514: 513:- we need significant coverage in independent reliable sources.-- 530:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
474:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
415:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
253:, the notability criteria for companies are laid out at 106: 102: 98: 170: 480:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 421:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 184: 43:). No further edits should be made to this page. 544:). No further edits should be made to this page. 324:Note: This discussion has been included in the 310:Note: This discussion has been included in the 296:Note: This discussion has been included in the 282:Note: This discussion has been included in the 326:list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions 284:list of Companies-related deletion discussions 298:list of Websites-related deletion discussions 8: 351: 323: 312:list of Texas-related deletion discussions 309: 295: 281: 226: 194:De-prodded by the author. Appears to fail 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 24: 263:conflict of interest guideline 1: 52:. Consensus is for deletion. 523:07:15, 28 January 2018 (UTC) 506:17:05, 25 January 2018 (UTC) 487:12:34, 24 January 2018 (UTC) 463:19:45, 21 January 2018 (UTC) 428:12:40, 17 January 2018 (UTC) 400:00:45, 13 January 2018 (UTC) 386:, which explicitly excludes 370:05:29, 10 January 2018 (UTC) 332:04:43, 10 January 2018 (UTC) 318:04:43, 10 January 2018 (UTC) 304:04:42, 10 January 2018 (UTC) 290:04:42, 10 January 2018 (UTC) 275:04:29, 10 January 2018 (UTC) 245:03:58, 10 January 2018 (UTC) 208:02:45, 10 January 2018 (UTC) 59:13:29, 31 January 2018 (UTC) 561: 533:Please do not modify it. 32:Please do not modify it. 73:DotComGuy (company) 65:DotComGuy (company) 489: 437:-- does not meet 430: 372: 356:comment added by 334: 320: 306: 292: 247: 231:comment added by 552: 535: 485: 479: 477: 475: 426: 420: 418: 416: 381: 189: 188: 174: 126: 114: 96: 57: 34: 560: 559: 555: 554: 553: 551: 550: 549: 548: 542:deletion review 531: 490: 481: 470: 468: 445:and in general 431: 422: 411: 409: 375: 259:WP:NOTINHERITED 131: 122: 87: 71: 68: 53: 48:The result was 41:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 558: 556: 547: 546: 526: 525: 508: 478: 467: 466: 465: 419: 408: 407: 406: 405: 404: 403: 402: 336: 335: 321: 307: 293: 279: 278: 277: 265:. Thank you. 221: 220: 215: 214: 192: 191: 128: 67: 62: 46: 45: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 557: 545: 543: 539: 534: 528: 527: 524: 520: 516: 512: 509: 507: 503: 499: 498:Slideshow Bob 495: 492: 491: 488: 484: 483:North America 476: 473: 464: 460: 456: 452: 448: 444: 440: 436: 433: 432: 429: 425: 424:North America 417: 414: 401: 397: 393: 389: 385: 379: 374: 373: 371: 367: 363: 359: 355: 348: 343: 340: 339: 338: 337: 333: 330: 327: 322: 319: 316: 313: 308: 305: 302: 299: 294: 291: 288: 285: 280: 276: 272: 268: 264: 260: 256: 252: 249: 248: 246: 242: 238: 234: 230: 223: 222: 217: 216: 212: 211: 210: 209: 205: 201: 197: 187: 183: 180: 177: 173: 169: 165: 162: 159: 156: 153: 150: 147: 144: 141: 137: 134: 133:Find sources: 129: 125: 121: 118: 112: 108: 104: 100: 95: 91: 86: 82: 78: 74: 70: 69: 66: 63: 61: 60: 56: 55:North America 51: 44: 42: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 532: 529: 510: 493: 469: 443:WP:CORPDEPTH 434: 410: 387: 378:Jacobbeasley 358:Jacobbeasley 352:— Preceding 329: 315: 301: 287: 251:Jacobbeasley 233:Jacobbeasley 227:— Preceding 193: 181: 175: 167: 160: 154: 148: 142: 132: 119: 49: 47: 31: 28: 455:K.e.coffman 158:free images 447:WP:TOOSOON 538:talk page 384:WP:ORGIND 37:talk page 540:or in a 472:Relisted 439:WP:NCORP 413:Relisted 366:contribs 354:unsigned 347:WP:NCORP 255:WP:NCORP 241:contribs 229:unsigned 196:WP:NCORP 117:View log 39:or in a 392:Rentier 342:Rentier 267:Rentier 200:Rentier 164:WP refs 152:scholar 90:protect 85:history 515:Rusf10 511:Delete 494:Delete 451:WP:AUD 435:Delete 136:Google 94:delete 50:delete 179:JSTOR 140:books 124:Stats 111:views 103:watch 99:links 16:< 519:talk 502:talk 459:talk 396:talk 362:talk 271:talk 237:talk 204:talk 172:FENS 146:news 107:logs 81:talk 77:edit 186:TWL 115:– ( 521:) 504:) 461:) 453:. 441:/ 398:) 390:. 368:) 364:• 328:. 314:. 300:. 286:. 273:) 243:) 239:• 206:) 166:) 109:| 105:| 101:| 97:| 92:| 88:| 83:| 79:| 517:( 500:( 457:( 394:( 380:: 376:@ 360:( 269:( 235:( 202:( 190:) 182:· 176:· 168:· 161:· 155:· 149:· 143:· 138:( 130:( 127:) 120:· 113:) 75:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
talk page
deletion review
North America
13:29, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
DotComGuy (company)
DotComGuy (company)
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Stats
Google
books
news
scholar
free images
WP refs
FENS
JSTOR
TWL
WP:NCORP
Rentier
talk

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.