Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Star Labs (company)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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. ✗plicit 14:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Star Labs (company)

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Star Labs (company) (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)

Non notable organization that lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of them thus WP:NCORP isn’t met. A before search links me to a bunch of mere announcements and press releases. WP:ORGDEPTH is non existent as well. Celestina007 (talk) 19:36, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another reason why the page name Star Labs (company) is good. Because there are already similar page names Starlab, S.T.A.R. Labs on Wikipedia. I want to distinguish this page with those pages. Junaruga (talk) 23:53, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A quick source assessment:

Created with templates {{ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{ORGCRIT assess}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Secondary? Overall value toward ORGCRIT
No Filed by company No Just a directory listing
Yes Yes – Coverage of product, not company Yes —
Yes presumed Yes presumed – Coverage of product, not company Yes —
Yes presumed Yes presumed – Coverage of product, not company Yes —
Yes presumed Yes presumed – Coverage of product, not company Yes —
Yes presumed Yes presumed – Mostly a product review, plus a (very little) bit about the company Yes —
Yes presumed Yes presumed – Coverage of product, not company Yes —
Yes presumed Yes presumed – Coverage of product, not company Yes —
Yes presumed Yes presumed – Coverage of product, not company Yes —
Yes presumed Yes presumed – Calls company "well known for nice Linux laptops", but little else here Yes —

Most of these sources fall in the same bucket: product reviews that say little or nothing about the company otherwise. So product details are (over)sourced, but there is little from which to build a well-rounded article about the company. The claim about software freedom doesn't seem to be supported by the sources used, but otherwise what's here is well cited. The product seems well-known enough that there should be some reliable coverage of the company, but it isn't here. Borderline. —swpbT • go beyond • bad idea 15:20, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:32, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for checking the sources! I can understand your points. You are right for the expression "software freedom" not seen in the source. Sorry for that. I referred Purism (company) to create the Star Labs page, and referred the expression. Maybe it's better to delete the expression in the Star Labs (company).
Now I understand the sources cover about the product, but don't the company. Here is another article by Forbes. I think this article covers a little bit more about the company.
> The product seems well-known enough that there should be some reliable coverage of the company, but it isn't here.
I agree. I couldn't find any other reliable sources about the company so far. Junaruga (talk) 00:20, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is a company/organization therefore NCORP guidelines apply. There are particular criteria for establishing the notability of a company. Also, unless blatantly obvious (e.g. Blog posts, no attributed journalist, Forbes contributors, etc), I'm assuming all the sources are reliable and the publishers are corporately independent from the topic organization - but there's more requirements than just "RS" for establishing notability.
  • Since the topic is a company/organization, we therefore require references that discuss the *company* in detail. As per WP:SIRS *each* reference must meet the criteria for establishing notability - the quantity of coverage is irrelevant so long as we find a minimum of two. WP:NCORP requires multiple sources (at least two) of deep or significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content".
  • "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. This is usually the criteria where most references fail. References cannot rely only on information provided by the company, quotations, press releases, announcements, interviews fail ORGIND. Whatever is left over must also meet CORPDEPTH.
None of the references meet the criteria for establishing notability of the company, none of the "reviews" provide more than a brief mention of the company. Topic therefore fails WP:NCORP. HighKing++ 14:17, 16 May 2022 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Star_Labs_(company)&oldid=1088864114"