Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XS International (2nd nomination)

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 07:02, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

XS International

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

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

Fails WP:NORG and WP:NCORP. Sources are either Wikipedia articles, PR pieces, or general reference articles - no reliable information about subject. Cannot find any reliable sources in web search. Article is basically promotional in nature. Rogermx (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Rogermx (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Rogermx (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Rogermx (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Rogermx (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Rogermx (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All I'm seeing when I look for sources are PR sites and republished releases. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:30, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - promotional article about a non-notable company. MER-C 16:12, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The creation of this article was the last action of an account active for 4 days in 2013, shortly after the previous instance had been speedy-deleted. Past version of this instance have included references such as this - a press release covering this and associated firms. A Gartner search lists 3 paywalled reports in 2016-7 with what appear to be listings of this firm among other vendors in their sector. All of this indicates a firm going about its business but I am not seeing the coverage needed to demonstrate attained notability here. AllyD (talk) 15:55, 25 February 2021 (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.