613:(AI) to find experts. And like it or not, we live in technological age where experts have a huge influence on the world and are often in short supply. AI is very important right now and starting to make dramatic results already (For example, AI right can now can shift through stacks of resumes and spit out a select few select resumes of candidates. Recently, a large truck of beer was driven from city to city by a driverless truck). AI is starting to be a big disruptor and game changer and that is why $ 15M of funding recently went to Newton X. Frankly, even though I took many computer and information systems management courses, the pace of success in AI applications has even surprised me.
1015:. Also, the references you've listed *all* fail the criteria for example funding notices, articles based on company announcements, podcasts with people affiliated with the company and articles written by people affiliated with the company. The examples you've provided are explicitly listed as *not* meeting the criteria for establishing notability as they fail
448:, none of those references meet the criteria for establishing notability. The TechCrunch reference is based on an interview with Chastel and there is nothing in the article that is "clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated with the company". The INC article is a mention-in-passing (describing Sascha as the COO/founder of NetwonX, nothing more) and fails
698:
in the B2B expertise market. Incumbent market research firms, consulting firms, and expert networks used to rely on preexisting pools of expert consultants,” he said. “We believe NewtonX is turning this model on its head by automating custom searches to recruit the best experts in real time for any
816:
410:
has asked the company's co-founder to author an article about Newton X, Inc., don't you think that means that NewtonX, Inc. holds importance and is not just a lemonade stand in a small town? Besides, WP:CORP says that "Arbitrary standards should not be used to create a bias favoring larger
608:
top tier business publications are not easy publications to be noted by. They are major business publications which serve as gatekeepers in terms of what business news is important. The reason why these major publications are covering NewtonX is that it is using cutting technology, namely
544:
article is a name drop for the company, the remaining is a magazine that markets startups and other general run of the mill business news. Very very poor sourcing. There is no secondary sources whatsoever, they are all primary, run of the mill business news.
989:--it's not that any single one of these articles alone are a "slam dunk" to keeping the article, but combined together, they show the subject meets GNG). I also think that if there are any problems with the article in its current form, they are fixable, per
792:
Entirely promotional and not a single reference (including the ones mentioned above) meet the criteria for establishing notability, nor am I able to locate a single reference that meets the criteria. Topic fails GNG and
1010:
Your admission that not "any single one of these articles alone" meets the criteria for establishing notability essentially translates to your agreement that according to our own guidelines this topic fails GNG and
206:
1041:. Come on people, learn how to recognize press releases when they bite you on the nose. Knox490 claims, above, that the Venture Beat article is original writing, not a press release, and cites this quote:
631:
Being top tier doesn't indicate the article is notable and every device and piece of software now being developed on the planet is now using some form of AI either for development or in production. The
974:
714:
One of NewtonX's owners essentially said, "its proprietary speech-to-text software enables it to deliver surveys and reports at twice the speed and half the cost of traditional panels".
159:
729:
The funding, technology and news coverage point to NewtonX being a transformational company. Knowledge (XXG) should create articles on transformational companies such as NewtonX.
945:. While it's obviously a smaller company relatively, enough sources have been written about it to keep the article (these, for example, in addition to the ones mentioned above:
331:--all of which are authoritative publications with respect to the field of business. The fact that these reliable sources discuss NewtonX, Inc. attest to its notability (passes
1002:
762:. Both the Inc and Forbes articles are mentions in passing, e.g. "Sascha Eder, COO/Founder of NewtonX" and fails SIGCOV and CORPDEPTH. The Venturebeat article is based on a
285:
889:, certainly, but they're rather indiscriminate about what they write about. If you're a tech startup and send them a press release, they'll probably cover it. Please see
986:
266:
200:
412:
865:) so perhaps you can link to *any two* references that you believe meet the criteria for establishing notability below and then perhaps some of the Delete !voters will
91:
962:
571:
was not a press release. It was an article on the company. All of the sourcing for the article are from reliable sources and none of them are press releases.
106:
411:
organizations or their products" as long as reliable sources, such as those you acknolwedged above, exist. Knowledge (XXG) itself has an article called "
329:
323:
166:
966:
982:
763:
715:
700:
481:
317:
1029:
885:. Looks like your typical (i.e. non-notable) early stage tech startup. I don't put much weight in TechCrunch or VentureBeat. They're
678:
568:
477:
311:
476:
The company raised twelve million dollars in Series A funding alone, a fact that has been reported in various media sources, such as
86:
79:
17:
132:
127:
136:
1073:
Ooops, I didn't remember that I'd !voted already in this AfD, so striking the duplicate. The comment still holds, though. --
221:
119:
958:
188:
100:
96:
909:
1099:
40:
440:
and requires references to have in-depth "Independent
Content" on the company. "Independent Content" is defined in
415:", which includes the company's founders and the article, as it is written now, fullfills the criteria provided in
385:
182:
970:
1043:
What struck us about NewtonX is that they’re attempting to create a paradigm shift in the B2B expertise market
380:
article is written by one of the company's co-founders. Do you really think this is enough to pass NCORP? –
818:
There are plenty more sources about this company available than what are currently present in the article.--
610:
540:. Of the remaining seven, one is non-rs, another one is initial funding, leaving two. One of remaining, the
178:
1080:
1064:
927:
923:
900:
875:
849:
803:
776:
738:
667:
622:
580:
555:
512:
493:
462:
428:
389:
352:
296:
277:
258:
61:
1020:
954:
533:
246:
1095:
694:
The
VentureBeat article indicates: "What struck us about NewtonX is that they’re attempting to create a
381:
254:
123:
57:
36:
228:
998:
1050:
950:
990:
416:
214:
115:
67:
1016:
767:
747:
529:
453:
449:
441:
1077:
1061:
1057:, etc. Perhaps all those publications just happened to think of that sentence on their own? --
897:
836:
489:
456:. The Forbes article is also a mention in passing (again, describing Sascha Eder, nothing more).
1012:
890:
862:
794:
525:
437:
242:
1054:
946:
919:
734:
618:
576:
289:
270:
75:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1094:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
942:
332:
238:
194:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
660:
548:
505:
424:
348:
250:
53:
938:
866:
812:
636:
is reporting 12million in funding, same as the other 8, so it is press release and non-RS.
340:
994:
649:
605:
403:
376:
article only mention NewtonX in a single sentence, and the paragraph about NewtonX in the
326:
886:
336:
699:
given client request and, in doing so, is capable of transforming multiple industries."
695:
756:
original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are
1074:
1058:
1024:
894:
870:
858:
821:
798:
771:
485:
457:
730:
614:
572:
536:
as the majority of the references are driven by press releases. 8 of the 15 state
153:
1046:
978:
637:
633:
597:
593:
445:
420:
399:
395:
359:
344:
314:
308:
751:
436:
The criteria for notability for companies/organization is fully documented in
528:
that was specifically meant to address these types of articles. Also asserts
452:. The Venturebeat article is based on a company announcements and fails
746:
The TechCrunch article is based on an interview with
Chastel and fails
815:; a simple Google search alone provides 227,000 results for NewtonX.
641:
601:
407:
320:
1090:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
502:
Raising funding isn't a notability criteria and never will be.
52:
defaulting to keep and w/o prejudice to a future renomination.
912:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
861:, great!! But your !vote is likely to be discounted (as per
681:
was not a press release. It was an article on the company.
237:
An unremarkable startup. Sourcing is in passing and / or
149:
145:
141:
213:
402:
sources look good". If NewtonX, Inc. wasn't notable,
524:
An article about about a classic startup that fails
918:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
227:
413:List of former employees of McKinsey & Company
648:That is not independent and is non-RS. The last
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1102:). No further edits should be made to this page.
307:. The NewtonX, Inc. article's citations include
284:Note: This discussion has been included in the
265:Note: This discussion has been included in the
286:list of Companies-related deletion discussions
267:list of New York-related deletion discussions
8:
107:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
754:and contains no "Independent Content" with
538:twelve million dollars in Series A funding
283:
264:
760:to a source unaffiliated to the subject
652:is a name drop. Hardly the gatekeepers.
1042:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
394:Well, you've acknolwedged that "the
646:Our company grew in its first year
24:
372:sources look good; however, the
92:Introduction to deletion process
1023:and/or are "trivial coverage".
406:wouldn't mention it at all. If
1081:23:20, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
1065:18:26, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
1045:. That same line was used by
1030:13:55, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
62:04:58, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
1:
1003:00:08, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
928:16:57, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
901:01:26, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
876:21:29, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
850:12:46, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
804:21:36, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
777:21:43, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
739:20:07, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
668:11:56, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
623:04:09, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
581:20:32, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
556:12:55, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
513:12:55, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
494:21:26, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
463:21:36, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
429:20:15, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
390:21:39, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
353:02:32, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
297:07:10, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
278:07:10, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
259:00:32, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
82:(AfD)? Read these primers!
1119:
1092:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
611:artificial intelligence
811:: The article passes
80:Articles for deletion
937:This article passes
766:and therefore fails
764:company announcement
758:clearly attributable
867:change their minds!
679:TechCrunch article
640:is the same. From
569:TechCrunch article
930:
299:
280:
97:Guide to deletion
87:How to contribute
1110:
917:
915:
913:
848:
847:
845:
842:
839:
833:
832:
830:
827:
824:
665:
663:
553:
551:
510:
508:
382:Lord Bolingbroke
363:
294:
275:
241:. Does not meet
232:
231:
217:
169:
157:
139:
77:
34:
1118:
1117:
1113:
1112:
1111:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1100:deletion review
931:
908:
906:
843:
840:
837:
835:
834:
828:
826:R E N Z O Y 1 6
825:
822:
820:
819:
661:
659:
549:
547:
506:
504:
357:
290:
271:
174:
165:
130:
114:
111:
74:
71:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1116:
1114:
1105:
1104:
1086:
1085:
1084:
1083:
1068:
1067:
1034:
1033:
1032:
916:
905:
904:
903:
880:
879:
878:
806:
786:
785:
784:
783:
782:
781:
780:
779:
722:
721:
720:
719:
718:
717:
707:
706:
705:
704:
703:
702:
696:paradigm shift
687:
686:
685:
684:
683:
682:
656:
655:
654:
653:
626:
625:
586:
585:
584:
583:
559:
558:
518:
517:
516:
515:
497:
496:
471:
470:
469:
468:
467:
466:
465:
301:
300:
281:
235:
234:
171:
110:
109:
104:
94:
89:
72:
70:
65:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1115:
1103:
1101:
1097:
1093:
1088:
1087:
1082:
1079:
1076:
1072:
1071:
1070:
1069:
1066:
1063:
1060:
1056:
1052:
1051:VC News Daily
1048:
1044:
1040:
1039:
1035:
1031:
1028:
1027:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1009:
1006:
1005:
1004:
1000:
996:
992:
988:
984:
980:
976:
972:
968:
964:
960:
956:
952:
948:
944:
940:
936:
933:
932:
929:
925:
921:
914:
911:
902:
899:
896:
892:
888:
884:
881:
877:
874:
873:
868:
864:
860:
856:
853:
852:
851:
846:
831:
817:
814:
810:
807:
805:
802:
801:
796:
791:
788:
787:
778:
775:
774:
769:
765:
761:
759:
753:
749:
745:
742:
741:
740:
736:
732:
728:
727:
726:
725:
724:
723:
716:
713:
712:
711:
710:
709:
708:
701:
697:
693:
692:
691:
690:
689:
688:
680:
676:
675:
674:
673:
672:
671:
670:
669:
666:
664:
651:
647:
643:
639:
635:
630:
629:
628:
627:
624:
620:
616:
612:
607:
603:
599:
595:
591:
588:
587:
582:
578:
574:
570:
566:
563:
562:
561:
560:
557:
554:
552:
543:
539:
535:
531:
527:
523:
520:
519:
514:
511:
509:
501:
500:
499:
498:
495:
491:
487:
483:
479:
475:
472:
464:
461:
460:
455:
451:
447:
443:
439:
435:
432:
431:
430:
426:
422:
418:
414:
409:
405:
401:
397:
393:
392:
391:
387:
383:
379:
375:
371:
367:
361:
356:
355:
354:
350:
346:
342:
338:
334:
330:
328:
324:
322:
318:
316:
312:
310:
306:
303:
302:
298:
295:
293:
287:
282:
279:
276:
274:
268:
263:
262:
261:
260:
256:
252:
248:
244:
240:
230:
226:
223:
220:
216:
212:
208:
205:
202:
199:
196:
193:
190:
187:
184:
180:
177:
176:Find sources:
172:
168:
164:
161:
155:
151:
147:
143:
138:
134:
129:
125:
121:
117:
116:NewtonX, Inc.
113:
112:
108:
105:
102:
98:
95:
93:
90:
88:
85:
84:
83:
81:
76:
69:
68:NewtonX, Inc.
66:
64:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1091:
1089:
1055:Built in NYC
1037:
1036:
1025:
1021:WP:CORPDEPTH
1007:
934:
920:Jovanmilic97
907:
882:
871:
854:
808:
799:
789:
772:
757:
755:
743:
658:
657:
645:
589:
564:
546:
541:
537:
534:WP:CORPDEPTH
521:
503:
473:
458:
433:
377:
373:
369:
365:
304:
292:CAPTAIN RAJU
291:
273:CAPTAIN RAJU
272:
247:WP:CORPDEPTH
236:
224:
218:
210:
203:
197:
191:
185:
175:
162:
73:
50:no consensus
49:
47:
31:
28:
662:scope_creep
638:VentureBeat
634:Tech Crunch
598:VentureBeat
594:Tech Crunch
550:scope_creep
507:scope_creep
400:VentureBeat
396:Tech Crunch
370:VentureBeat
366:Tech Crunch
315:VentureBeat
309:Tech Crunch
251:K.e.coffman
201:free images
54:Ad Orientem
991:WP:RUBBISH
752:churnalism
644:it states
417:WP:ORGCRIT
1096:talk page
1047:Pulse 2.0
1017:WP:ORGIND
995:1990'sguy
768:WP:ORGIND
748:WP:ORGIND
530:WP:ORGIND
454:WP:ORGIND
450:WP:ORGIND
442:WP:ORGIND
37:talk page
1098:or in a
1075:RoySmith
1059:RoySmith
1026:HighKing
1013:WP:NCORP
1008:Response
910:Relisted
895:RoySmith
891:WP:THREE
872:HighKing
863:WP:GHITS
859:Renzoy16
800:HighKing
795:WP:NCORP
773:HighKing
750:. It is
526:WP:NCORP
486:Eliko007
459:HighKing
438:WP:NCORP
243:WP:NCORP
160:View log
101:glossary
39:or in a
1019:and/or
943:WP:CORP
855:Comment
841:t a l k
744:Comment
731:Knox490
615:Knox490
573:Knox490
565:Comment
434:Comment
333:WP:CORP
239:WP:SPIP
207:WP refs
195:scholar
133:protect
128:history
78:New to
1078:(talk)
1062:(talk)
1038:Delete
939:WP:GNG
898:(talk)
893:. --
883:Delete
813:WP:GNG
790:Delete
642:Forbes
602:Forbes
567:: The
522:Delete
446:Desmay
421:desmay
408:Forbes
378:Forbes
360:Desmay
345:desmay
341:WP:GNG
325:, and
321:Forbes
179:Google
137:delete
1053:, by
1049:, by
935:Keep:
887:WP:RS
337:WP:RS
222:JSTOR
183:books
167:Stats
154:views
146:watch
142:links
16:<
999:talk
993:. --
941:and
924:talk
857:Hey
809:Keep
735:talk
677:The
650:Inc.
619:talk
606:Inc.
604:and
590:Keep
577:talk
532:and
490:talk
480:and
474:Keep
425:talk
404:Inc.
398:and
386:talk
374:Inc.
368:and
364:The
349:talk
339:and
327:Inc.
305:Keep
255:talk
215:FENS
189:news
150:logs
124:talk
120:edit
58:talk
542:Inc
343:).
229:TWL
158:– (
1001:)
987:11
983:10
926:)
869:.
797:.
770:.
737:)
621:)
600:,
596:,
592:.
579:)
492:)
484:.
482:VB
478:TC
444:.
427:)
419:.
388:)
351:)
335:,
319:,
313:,
288:.
269:.
257:)
249:.
245:/
209:)
152:|
148:|
144:|
140:|
135:|
131:|
126:|
122:|
60:)
997:(
985:,
981:,
979:9
977:,
975:8
973:,
971:7
969:,
967:6
965:,
963:5
961:,
959:4
957:,
955:3
953:,
951:2
949:,
947:1
922:(
844:•
838:•
829:A
823:A
733:(
617:(
575:(
488:(
423:(
384:(
362::
358:@
347:(
253:(
233:)
225:·
219:·
211:·
204:·
198:·
192:·
186:·
181:(
173:(
170:)
163:·
156:)
118:(
103:)
99:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.