Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Software

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Software. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Software|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Software. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Software

TACTIC (web framework)

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

Seems to have been created by IP editors for promotional purposes. Tagged for notability. -- Beland (talk) 10:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 10:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nese Server 2008 R2

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG and WP:PRODUCT according to my searches. The creator also seems to have some sort of WP:COI with NeseOS Corporation. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:13, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Seems to be a non-notable software project, couldn't find any evidence of notability or meaningful secondary coverage. MCE89 (talk) 10:51, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable, no sources found. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:35, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eitaa Messenger

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

Reason: the app is never mentioned throughly independent of the other apps outside Iranian state sponsored sites Baratiiman (talk) 19:06, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Software and Iran. Shellwood (talk) 19:09, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am writing to oppose the deletion of the Eitaa Messenger article. Below, I address the claims made in the nomination and demonstrate the article's alignment with Wikipedia’s standards for neutrality, verifiability, and notability.

---

1. Addressing the Claim that All Websites Mentioning Eitaa are State-Owned

The assertion that every website mentioning Eitaa Messenger is state-owned is an extraordinary claim requiring substantial evidence. Such a broad statement demands:

Proof for each individual site: The nominator must provide reliable references to show that all websites discussing Eitaa are indeed state-owned.

Reputable third-party verification: Without such evidence, the claim remains speculative and does not justify deletion.

The article itself does not rely exclusively—or even primarily—on Persian or Iranian state-affiliated sources.

Many western even American even American state owned websites have mentioned eitaa specifically, except you want to excuse them to for being Iranina sponsored like for tens or hundreds of sites you did now. Here are a few for instance:

The Open Technology Fund for its security audits (www.opentech.fund/security-safety-audits/iranian-messaging-apps-security-audit).

Academic studies published internationally, such as on PubMed Central (www.pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11558972).

This diversity of sources underscores the article’s neutrality and adherence to Wikipedia’s standards.

---

2.

Before the article was created, Eitaa Messenger already had an entry on Wikidata. This demonstrates the platform’s recognized notability and importance within the digital communication ecosystem. The existence of a Wikidata entry reinforces the need for a detailed and well-referenced Wikipedia page.

---

3.

Widely Used Platform in Iran

Eitaa Messenger is one of the most used instant messaging platforms in Iran, making it a crucial part of the country’s digital infrastructure.

Comparison with Smaller Platforms:Other smaller Iranian platforms, such as Soroush, Bale, Rubika, and iGap, have dedicated Wikipedia pages despite having smaller user bases or less impact. Deleting Eitaa’s article while keeping these others would create an inconsistency and unfair precedent on Wikipedia.

---

4.

The article on Eitaa Messenger provides a balanced perspective, presenting both its features and criticisms.

Neutrality: The article refrains from promoting Eitaa and relies on credible references from diverse sources, ensuring adherence to Wikipedia’s neutrality policy.

If there are specific issues in the article, they should be addressed through constructive edits, not deletion.

---

5.

I think if a user doesn't like an articles content if shouldn't demand the deletion of the whole thing (first without a request and discussion and redirecting to a new self made previewed poorly referenced article (names Iranian applications and after being declined for two times the adding a request for delete) but try to improve it.

---

The Eitaa Messenger article is well-referenced, neutral, and meets Wikipedia’s notability criteria. The claim that all websites mentioning Eitaa are state-owned is unfounded and requires evidence for each source. Furthermore, the article’s pre-existing Wikidata entry and Eitaa’s status as one of Iran’s most used messaging platforms reinforce its importance.

If the nominator has concerns, they should propose edits to improve the article rather than advocate for its deletion. Removing the page would disregard its significance and undermine Wikipedia’s mission of providing a comprehensive knowledge base.

I strongly urge the community to retain this article and support collaborative efforts to enhance it if needed.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely 93.71.57.57 (talk) 19:39, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RealFlight

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

Fails WP:GNG. I couldn't find coverage other than from hobbyist blogs. FlightGear is a potential redirect target, as the article says it's a commercial rebranding of that software, but RealFlight is not mentioned at the target. ~ A412 ^talk! 18:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Aviation, and Software. ~ A412 ^talk! 18:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Only sources that exist in the article are self-published and thus fails WP:GNG. Protoeus (talk) 00:37, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Software distro

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

Abandoned article showing no significance. TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 04:28, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:42, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 19:54, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Soft-redirect to wikt:distro#Noun. Article was split from Software distribution last month (December 2024). While the topic is likely notable, the current version of the article has no references supporting verifiability or notability. A WP:BEFORE search does not appear to have been conducted prior to AfD nomination; searching for "software distro" overwhelmingly returns articles on Linux distributions, and this subtopic is sufficiently distinct that redirecting or merging here does not seem reasonable. Instead, I propose the article falls within the scope of WP:POINTWIKT, which states that pages which could potentially be proper articles but are dictionary-like stubs at the moment can be soft-redirected to Wiktionary using Template:Wiktionary redirect. Preimage (talk) 10:40, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FlashDevelop

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

Abandonware with no indication of notability per WP:PRODUCT or WP:GNG, deleted on notability grounds following a prod in 2022. Article was recreated as a redirect to the apparently unrelated MonoDevelop in 2023, and the current version is a second attempt at creating a stub from the redirect. Last commit to the software project on GitHub was 4 years ago (before this article was last deleted), and a WP:BEFORE search turns up no significant coverage in reliable sources, just run of the mill coverage in developer blogs. Wikishovel (talk) 17:57, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Software. Wikishovel (talk) 17:57, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zensai AI

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

Contested draftification, so off to AfD. Company fails WP:NCORP, and it's a particularly egregious case of WP:ADMASQ, almost to the line of a G11. Contrary to the article's claim, it does not appear on the 2024 FT 1000 list (not that that would confer notability if it did). The rest of the sources are limited to:

Corporate press releases ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5])
Articles by Zensai employees ([6], [7])
WP:PRIMARYSOURCES like Zensai's description of its products in app stores ([8]) and other Zensai sponsored content ([9])
A promotional product review ([10])
Sources that I'm guessing were added in error since they either don't mention the company ([11]) or are the website of an entirely different company.

WP:BEFORE search turns up only more corporate press releases. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and Denmark. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Agree with the source review above, PR items and other sources that aren't reliable. I can only bring up PR items in my searches as well. Appears to be PROMO. Oaktree b (talk) 18:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article on Zensai AI meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines, with independent coverage highlighting its innovations in AI applications across healthcare, finance, and education. It documents industry recognition, impactful partnerships, and contributions to global challenges. The article is neutral, well-sourced, and provides valuable information on a significant player in the AI field. I recommend retaining it and addressing any concerns for compliance with Wikipedia standards. Hussainxyz (talk) 02:24, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly recommend you not use AI tools to generate responses and actually address the source analysis in the nomination. (GPTZero rates this as 100% probability of being AI-generated.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:53, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Any concerns" are mainly the lack of sourcing. Ask the AI to help find some, which it likely won't, but anything's worth a try. Oaktree b (talk) 17:47, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WiiLink

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

Fails WP:GNG, sourced to primary sources. Best I could find was this single source on a project that merged with them: [12] and this passing mention [13]. ~ A412 ^talk! 17:36, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Software. ~ A412 ^talk! 17:36, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Article is reliant on primary sources and fails WP:WEBCRIT. Jordano^5³ 18:19, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No significant secondary coverage from reliable sources. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 02:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of significant news coverage.Shinadamina (talk) 08:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Moarnighar (talk) 15:00, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cydoor

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

Fails WP:GNG BryceM2001 (talk) 20:44, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Software and Israel. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:28, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:23, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: @BryceM2001: could you explain what you mean when you say the subject fails WP:GNG? The following sources seem to me like they might establish notability: [14] [15] [16] --Richard Yin (talk) 12:50, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting due to lack of participation. User:BryceM2001, as the nominator, please respond to the question asked of you here. You didn't provide much of a deletion rationale for this article or show that a BEFORE had been done.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:20, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete Lacks significant coverage: routine detection announcements only. --Altenmann >talk 00:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not seeing coverage of the adware more detailed than brief paragraphs, e.g. [17], [18]. There are a few brief articles of the company itself in trade publications such as Adweek, also not enough for notability. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 08:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mallzee

AfDs for this article:

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

Mallzee shut down in 2021. The article was flagged for neutrality and promotional content in August 2017, it is written mostly like a self-interested ad, and with the lack of any changes to rectify those issues or any edits to indicate the business shut down evidences minimal interest in article. At present, I feel the article doesn't provide encyclopaedic value and given the years of opportunity since the closure of the business without as much as an update indicating such, I doubt the quality of this article will improve. ~ Chip 🐺 08:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. ~ Chip 🐺 08:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe it passes WP:NORG, even considering some articles, the coverage was incidental. ~ Chip 🐺 08:42, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion, Software, and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:30, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already brought to AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 09:13, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kdan Mobile

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

No properly reliable sources, seemingly written by someone affiliated. Found a profile on CommonWealth Magazine (Taiwan), but that is not enough for company notability. IgelRM (talk) 20:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Taiwan. IgelRM (talk) 20:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:09, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Two WP:TECHCRUNCH sources (which do not count for notability) and one primary one. Fails both WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. Madeleine (talk) 22:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Keep per Cunard's source analysis below. Madeleine (talk) 16:25, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi Madeleine961 (talk · contribs). I found some additional sources below. Would you review? Thank you. Cunard (talk) 10:32, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Yes, I believe the sources you found demonstrates notability and significant coverage. I will change my !vote. Good work and cheers. Madeleine (talk) 16:24, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Thank you for reviewing the sources and reconsidering your position! Cunard (talk) 01:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Yan, Lou-you 顏漏有 (2022). 新創成長的關鍵：解開台灣新創企業從0到10億元的祕密 [The Key to Startup Growth: Unveiling the Secrets Behind Taiwanese Startups' Journey from $0 to $1 Billion] (in Chinese). Taipei: Business Weekly Publications 商周出版. ISBN 978-626-318-392-6. Retrieved 2024-12-29 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "創業之初,正好抓住App發展初期,競爭者不多,當時蘋果應用程式商店 ( App Store)上的App總數還不到一千個,但凱鈿可以開發出上百個不同的 App,營收穩定成長,但沒多久,他們的發展、成長開始出現瓶頸。除了越來越多新進開發者及大公司投入App開發,加上免費App的選擇變多,競爭加劇, 若要吸引使用者,勢必要加大行銷投資。另一個本質上的問題在於,使用者是採取一次性付費買服務,但公司仍要持續提供維運,長久下去,不利於公司成長。"
  From Google Translate: "At the beginning of the business, Kdan caught the early stage of App development and there were not many competitors. At that time, the total number of Apps on the Apple App Store was less than a thousand, but Kdan could develop hundreds of different Apps, and the business Revenues grew steadily, but before long, bottlenecks began to appear in their development and growth. In addition to more and more new developers and large companies investing in App development, as well as the increasing number of free App choices and intensifying competition, it is necessary to increase marketing investment if you want to attract users. Another fundamental problem is that users pay a one-time fee for services, but the company still has to continue to provide maintenance and operation. In the long run, it is not conducive to the company's growth."
  The book notes: "然而,過去的模式主要靠著多樣化產品在支撐,精簡後,營收規模自然大受影響,公司營運陷入極大困境,幾位創辦人不得不向員工承認錯誤,抵押、賣地、信用卡借款,這些創業故事中常見的情節,也在凱鈿發生。"
  From Google Translate: "However, the past model was mainly supported by diversified products. After streamlining, the revenue scale was naturally greatly affected, and the company's operations were in great difficulties. The founders had to admit their mistakes to the employees, resorting to pledging assets, selling land, and borrowing on credit cards—common scenarios in startup stories, which also occurred at Kdan."
2. "新創的國際化策略及管理精準掌握海外企業需求,他擁800萬會員走向B2B" [The Internationalization Strategy of Startups and Management: Precisely Understanding Overseas Business Needs, With 8 Million Members Moving Towards B2B]. BusinessNext 數位時代 (in Chinese). December 2020. pp. 50–51. Retrieved 2024-12-29 – via Google Books.
  The article notes: "2015 年,除了商業模式「轉彎」,凱鈿也開始收斂 App的開發數量,蘇柏州當時梳理出3個主要產品線,包括 Document 365、Creativity 365 及Kdan Cloud。直到 2019 年,團隊才又端出另一條產品線:點點簽 DottedSign。自高峰時期1年52款App,到深耕3~ 4款系列產品,他們開始專注於產品的整合,以提供更好服務來維持用戶。2019 年,凱鈿訂閱戶的續訂率達8成、截至目前也累積了 800 萬註冊會員,其中有約3萬筆企業客戶名單,成為他們推廣SaaS服務的起點。"
  From Google Translate: "In 2015, in addition to the "turn" in its business model, Kdan also began to curb the number of app development. Subazhou sorted out three main product lines at that time, including Document 365, Creativity 365 and Kdan Cloud. It wasn’t until 2019 that the team launched another product line: DottedSign. From the peak of 52 apps per year to 3 to 4 product series, they began to focus on product integration to provide better services to maintain users. In 2019, the renewal rate of Kdan's subscribers reached 80%, and it has accumulated 8 million registered members so far, including about 30,000 corporate customer lists, which has become the starting point for them to promote SaaS services."
3. Li, I-Ju 李宜儒 (2023-12-03). "台南億級APP一哥1／累計超過2億次的下載量　從閱讀器打造生態系" [Tainan's Billion-Level App Leader: Over 200 Million Downloads, Building an Ecosystem from a Reader]. Want Weekly [zh] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2024-12-29. Retrieved 2024-12-29.
  The article notes: "CTWANT記者調查，Kdan，其實是2009年在台南永康起家的本土APP軟體公司｢凱鈿」（Kdan），以APP搶快搶多求生，但在免費APP海量出現後險遭滅頂，轉而聚焦PDF工具用程式，並推出訂閱制服務，定期根據用戶反饋進行更新，獲得用戶好評，在2016年起獲得天使投資新台幣4000萬元，2018年完成A輪募資500萬美元（約新台幣1.5億元），由美商中經合集團、達盈管理顧問及日本Accord Ventures等共同投資。"
  From Google Translate: "According to CTWANT reporter's investigation, Kdan is actually a local APP software company "Kdan" (Kdan) founded in Yongkang, Tainan in 2009. It used APPs to grab the quickest and the most in order to survive. However, it was nearly wiped out after the massive emergence of free APPs, and it instead focused on PDFs. Tool program, and launched a subscription-based service, which is regularly updated based on user feedback, and has won praise from users. Since 2016, it has received angel investment of NT$40 million. In 2018, it completed the A-round fundraising of US$5 million (approximately NT$150 million). Yuan), jointly invested by the US-China Economic Cooperation Group, Daying Management Consultants and Japan's Accord Ventures."
4. Lin, Joyce (2020-10-05). "The Top Taiwanese App Company You Never Heard Of". CommonWealth Magazine. Archived from the original on 2020-11-14. Retrieved 2024-12-29.
  The article notes: "Lman Chu (朱宜振), the founder and CEO of blockchain startup BiiLabs, said Kdan’s choice at its inception to develop “tool apps” was smart because those apps resonate across borders, helping penetrate overseas markets and build overseas teams. Not coincidentally, Kdan has focused mainly on users in Western countries. At present, the United States is Kdan’s biggest market, accounting for 40 percent of its revenues, with another 25 percent coming from Europe, 20 percent from China, 5 percent from Japan, and 10 percent from the rest of the world. Kdan’s apps have gained strong followings in the West because users see them as native English-language products."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Kdan Mobile (traditional Chinese: 凱鈿; simplified Chinese: 凯钿) to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 10:32, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for searching:

1. Mentions Asia America Multitechnology Association, does not appear particular independent?

2. A trade source, I found this about page.

3. Covers Kdan Office, Generative AI and Hancom, a bit about Kdan and an interview with chair 蘇柏州.

4. (I will note that I had already linked CommonWealth mag in my nomination).

So I don't think the sources here are extraordinary.

Edit: Had accidentally swapped 1 and 2. I found a profile on chinatimes.com, a rather promotional article on businesstoday.com.tw and one comparison to Adobe by Techcrunch. IgelRM (talk) 23:11, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I consider the first source to be independent. It is unclear to me where Asia America Multitechnology Association is mentioned and why this would mean the source is not independent. BusinessNext is a business magazine focused on the technology and Internet sectors, which has a much broader scope than a trade magazine dedicated to a particular field. I consider it to be sufficiently independent to establish notability. The third and fourth sources include enough independent reporting and analysis about Kdan Mobile to establish notability. Cunard (talk) 01:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. The description on GBooks says: "AAMA台北搖籃計畫十週年的智慧傳承

顏漏有校長首本著作". I'm unsure if I understand correctly but AAMA refers to aforementioned association.

2. The magazine appears specifically about startups and management, so I'm unsure how to evaluate but I agree it contributes.

3. It also needs to be WP:SIGCOV of the company specifically. The Chinatimes profile (by the same publisher) is certainly but I don't know how business profiles are evaluated.

@Madeleine961 Could you look into this again?

Edit: I am asking because the founder is listed on AAMA Taipei. About Cradle Project IgelRM (talk) 07:13, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the explanation. I've stricken the first source as based on your explanation as it may not be independent of the subject. Cunard (talk) 13:25, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like further review of these new sources. Remember, they do not have to be "extraordinary", just sufficient to establish notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I have found some sources such as

Mysecretgarden (talk) 13:27, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RS: Techcrunch is situational and funding news doesn't give company notability. AWN is about the animation software and the last two, unsure if reliable, about the PDF software, specifically. IgelRM (talk) 06:49, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the article needs to be supplemented with references found as above, but in general it demonstrates the company's importance through credible sources and contributions --Kej Keir (talk) 08:32, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - At least for now. IgelRM raised some valid concerns and asked if this could be looked at again, but there has been no further work. In the meantime a load more sources were added. The relist comment requests a source review. Here is mine.
This is a company therefore WP:NCORP requires multiple deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information on the company per WP:ORGDEPTH. Per WP:ORGIND, "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. That is, references cannot rely only on information provided by the company - such as articles that rely entirely on quotations, press releases, announcements, interviews, website information, etc - even where such information has been reworded. If it isn't clearly independent content then it fails ORGIND. My analysis of all the sources provided in this AfD follows:

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?
New Creation and Growth - Unravel the secret of Taiwan's startups from 0 to 1 billion yuan [19]		Published by Business Week Publishing apparently. That would make it generally reliable for business news.	This appears to be a very short mention in a book attempting to survey Taiwan's startup landscape. There is some information about their products, but it seems to be quite limited. When discussing ORGGDEPTH, NCORP discusses coverage that meets the guideline. It says: Such coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond brief mentions and routine announcements, and makes it possible to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub about the organization. That is not what we have here. It may be there is more in this book, but I don't read the language and don't have the book. But I expect this is all there is
Business Next Issue 319 [20]	Because of the source it is not certain this meets WP:ORGIND	Apparently a book but actually a magazine. A trade source.	As for the above, WP:ORGDEPTH is not met with the level of coverage here which is primarily about the apps and not about the business.	News reporting aspects are primary, but the question being asked of this source would make company information secondary. There is just not much there.
https://www.ctwant.com/article/301042/	I cannot tell if this is independent or not as I do not speak the language and investigating only with Google Translate. I would give it a pass if it were a clear pass elsewhere, but it is not.	Appears to be a reputable and bylined publication in an edited magazine (probably web only).	Once again, mostly about products and the little about the company does not meet ORGDEPTH.	It appears to be relying on some other reporting and is not itself news reporting.
https://english.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=2809	Bylined Joyce Lin, who has authored multiple articles. Web only article, but no indication this is not independent	As far as I can see this is a web only article from a reputable outlet with an editorial process. No obvious reliability concerns. I note that this profile was mentioned in the nomination.	Meets WP:ORGDEPTH
TechCrunch [21] [22] [23] - Multiple articles from the same source count as one under WP:SIRS	– Partial. Startup funding reporting is independent, but the third article, in particular, is based on information coming from Kenny Su, and does not meet [{WP:ORGIND]].	I believe they are considered reliable. Trade source.	– There is little information about the company that is independent. What is independent is not significant per ORGDEPTH.	Three news reports about the startup. These are news reports - primary sources.
TechinAsia [24]	– Partial. The article is occasioned by a bit of news (and that information is primary), but what Kenny Su says about the company is not independent.	I believe it is reliable, although I haven't fully investigated.	Founded in 2009, Kdan Mobile provides digital productivity and content creation platforms. This is followed by a quote from Kenny Su and a product plug, but that is not independent. This, therefore, does not provide SIGCOV at CORPDEPTH.	– This source is occasioned news report for series B funding. The news report element is primary, but analysis would be secondary. Nevertheless, what we have does not meet ORGIND, which is a general problem for series B funding articles. These are startups promoting themselves.
AWN [25]	"Source: Kdan Mobile". Although it is bylined, this appears to be based ona. press release, and the download link has a cimmission based tracker link.	– It is reliable for reviews about animation software but irrelevant as to whether it is reliable for information about the company as it doesn't have any.	All about "Free Animation Desk App Available for Download". There is no information at all about the company, let alone any ORGDEPTH coverage.	Reviews are secondary for the product, although this is not about the company
Techworm [26]	Download link has a tracker to generate commission	– It is reliable for reviews about Windows software but irrelevant as to whether it is reliable for information about the company as it doesn't have any.	All about KDAN PDF Reader, and nothing at all on KDAN the company. Just	Reviews are secondary for the product, although this is not about the company
Windows Report [27]	"We may get a commission if you buy through our links"	– It is reliable for reviews about Windows software but irrelevant as to whether it is reliable for information about the company as it doesn't have any.	All about KDAN PDF Reader, and nothing at all on KDAN the company. Just	Reviews are secondary for the product, although this is not about the company

So we have one good source (already mentioned in the nomination), but we need multiple sources. The first of Cunard's might be worth revisiting, or there may be more elsewhere, but at this point we are not past WP:NCORP. I would like to revise my opinion, but I do not see the sources yet. Hopefully more can be found. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:02, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The BusinessNext and Want Weekly articles discuss the company's history and several of its products. If the sources just focused on a specific product, that would not be significant coverage of the company. But when as is the case here, the sources provide an overview of the company's products while profiling the company, the sources provide significant coverage of the company. Here are additional sources I found:
1. Chu, Yung-kuang 朱永光 (2016-11-01). "〈薪火新苗〉本土App商冒出頭打造亞洲Adobe" [〈New Sparks and New Shoots〉 Local Taiwanese App Developer Emerges, Aims to Build "Asian Adobe"]. United Daily News (in Chinese). p. B4.
  United Daily News's Yung-kuang Chu writes the column "New Sparks and New Shoots" (Chinese: 薪火新苗), which is published every other Tuesday. I found a copy of this column in the United Daily News archives. There is a copy of the column on a blog which says it has been "reproduced with the permission of the author". The article notes: "曾獲選美國Apple App Store年度最佳娛樂與工具類應用廠商，所開發的產品多次以最值得購買、蘋果員工最愛、熱門精選、主題推薦登上App Store首頁，預計今年底將突破全球1億下載量，如此亮眼的成績，是來自台南的台灣本土開發商凱釹行動科技（Kdan Mobile Software）。"
  From Google Translate: "Kdan Mobile Software, a Taiwan-based developer from Tainan, has been recognised as one of the best entertainment and tools developers on the U.S. Apple App Store. Its products have repeatedly been featured on the App Store's homepage, including as "Most Worth Buying," "Apple Staff Favorites," "Popular Picks," and "Recommended Themes." The company is expected to surpass 100 million downloads worldwide by the end of this year. This impressive achievement is the result of the efforts of Kdan Mobile, a local Taiwanese company founded in 2009."
  The article notes: "成立於2009年，創辦人蘇柏州早年任職於工研院，在App Store推出後不久，看准其發展潛力及商業模式，即著手投入研發此一新程式語言。有別於其他App開發商，凱釷長期深耕行動閱讀、多媒體創作、繪圖與影像編輯等領域，以「亞洲Adobe」的定位進軍國際市場，鎖定喜歡塗鴉及從事創作的族群，打造完善的數位內容創作工具。"
  From Google Translate: "Founded by Su Bo-Chou, who previously worked at the Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI), Kdan Mobile started developing mobile applications shortly after the App Store's launch, seeing the potential and business opportunities in this new development platform. Unlike other app developers, Kdan Mobile has focused on areas such as mobile reading, multimedia creation, drawing, and image editing. It has positioned itself as "Asia's Adobe" and aims to serve the international market, targeting users who enjoy doodling and creative work, offering a complete suite of digital content creation tools."
  The article notes: "相較於以PC為主的Adobe，凱釷更早打入行動裝置市場。旗下主力產品NoteLedge、PDF Markup、Animation Desk、Write-On Video、Pocket Scanner，簡易、直覺式的操作界面是最大特色，大幅降低使用者的學習門檻，即使沒有受過專業設計訓練，也能輕鬆上手、享受創作所帶來的樂趣。"
  From Google Translate: "Compared to Adobe, which is mainly focused on PC-based software, Kdan Mobile entered the mobile device market much earlier. Its flagship products, such as NoteLedge, PDF Markup, Animation Desk, Write-On Video, and Pocket Scanner, feature simple and intuitive interfaces, making them accessible even to users without professional design training. This approach lowers the learning curve significantly, enabling anyone to easily start creating and enjoy the process of content creation."
2. Peng, Tzu-hao 彭子豪 (2021-11-17). "凱鈿業務專一入選新創明日之星" [Kdan Mobile's Focused Business Selected as the "Next Big Star" of Taiwan's Startup Scene]. United Daily News (in Chinese). p. C8.
  The article notes: "為讓台灣新創企業能立足國際及展現能見度，國發會推動NEXT BIG新創明日之星計畫，首波9家新創在總統蔡英文的站台下公布，其中軟體服務商凱鈿行動科技備受矚目，其因該公司是南部少數別具規模的軟體開發商，2009年成立至今軟體下載更累積超過2億次。"
  From Google Translate: "To help Taiwanese startups gain a foothold internationally and showcase their visibility, the National Development Council (NDC) launched the "Next Big Star" startup program. The first batch of nine startups was announced under the patronage of President Tsai Ing-wen, with Kdan Mobile Technology, a software service provider, receiving significant attention. The company, one of the few sizable software developers in southern Taiwan, has accumulated over 200 million software downloads since its founding in 2009."
  The article notes: "隨著Adobe進入行動服務、蘋果iOS開放對於PDF檔的支援，下載量下滑成為當時凱鈿行動科技的一大挑戰，為此在2012年公司獲資策會旗下資鼎創投基金，加上公司現金水位還不差，進而加強產品深度外，積極參加國內外各大、小軟體賽事，無形中提高公司能見度，並於2013至14年間推出跨平台文件管理服務。"
  From Google Translate: "However, as Adobe entered the mobile service market and Apple's iOS began supporting PDF files, Kdan Mobile faced the challenge of a declining download rate. To address this, the company secured investment from the Institute for Information Industry's (III) Vanguard Venture Capital Fund in 2012. With strong cash flow, the company deepened its product offerings and actively participated in both domestic and international software competitions, raising its visibility. In 2013 and 2014, the company launched a cross-platform document management service."
3. Chen, Hui-chen 陳惠珍 (2014-03-20). "微型創業－創業心法創業就是做自己擅長且喜歡做的事。凱鈿App開發行動玩家按讚蘇柏州成功挺進歐美，成立５年來全球下載突破2,000萬次，下一步強攻陸、日市場" [Micro-Entrepreneurship – The Mindset of Entrepreneurship: It's about doing what you’re good at and passionate about. Kdan App Development – Mobile Players Show Their Support. Su Bozhou Successfully Entered Europe and the U.S., With Over 20 Million Global Downloads in 5 Years; Next Step: Aggressively Targeting the Chinese and Japanese Markets]. China Times (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-01-04. Retrieved 2025-01-04.
  The article notes: "手機應用程式（App）市場競爭激烈，由蘇柏州所創辦的凱鈿行動科技設計公司，5年多來，已推出30多款跨平台的手機應用程式，至今已創下全球2,000餘萬次下載佳績，還曾獲得「最值得購買」、「蘋果員工最愛」等評語，受到全球不少手機使用者的推薦。工研院出身的創辦人蘇柏州，因看到Apple推智慧手機及App Store的成立，因而發現App開發的契機，進而觀察到切入世界的接口。"
  From Google Translate: "Competition in the mobile application (App) market is fierce. Kdan Mobile Technology Design Company, founded by Su Baizhou, has launched more than 30 cross-platform mobile applications in more than five years, and has achieved more than 20 million downloads worldwide so far. It has also received reviews such as "Most Worth Buying" and "Apple Employees' Favorite", and is recommended by many mobile phone users around the world."
  The article notes: "然而，現階段歐美市場，佔了凱鈿總銷售70％上下，在邁入全球突破2000萬下載量的新里程碑下，不僅已證實創立公司所設定的佈局策略是正確的，未來也有能力，將挑戰化為經營特色的實力。目前，依靠擁有完善的行銷團隊，除了歐美市場經營外，另針對中國與日本地區從事行銷規劃，並且逐步配置在地行銷人員，藉由他們可以精準地跨越語言的隔閡，把公司想傳達的產品構想，傳遞給潛在客戶群。"
  From Google Translate: "However, at this stage, the European and American markets account for about 70% of Kdan's total sales. As it reaches a new milestone of exceeding 20 million downloads globally, it has not only been confirmed that the layout strategy set by the founding company is correct, but also has the ability to do so in the future. The ability to turn challenges into business characteristics. At present, relying on a complete marketing team, in addition to operating in the European and American markets, it is also engaged in marketing planning for China and Japan, and gradually allocates local marketing personnel, through which they can accurately overcome language barriers and convey the products that the company wants to convey. idea and pass it on to the potential customer base."
4. Lai, Chao-nan 賴昭男 (2016-07-30). "職場達人－凱鈿行動科技創辦人兼執行長蘇柏州App創業從iPhone 3G開始" [Workplace Expert – Founder and CEO of Kdan Technology, Su Bozhou, App Entrepreneurship Starting with iPhone 3G]. China Times (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-01-04. Retrieved 2025-01-04.
  The article notes: "2009年3月，蘇柏州正式成立凱鈿行動科技。公司只有5個人，除了蘇柏州和另1個台灣伙伴，其他3個人來自大陸。蘇柏州將技術開發部分交給大陸團隊負責；在網路公司裡，這種遠距合作模式很常見，透過分工，蘇柏州也更能專注在市場研究上。"
  From Google Translate: "In March 2009, Su Bozhou officially founded Kaidan Mobile Technology. The company had only five employees: Su and one Taiwanese partner, while the other three were from mainland China. Su delegated the technical development to the mainland team. Remote collaboration like this is common in internet companies, and it allowed Su to focus more on market research through division of labor."
5. Wu, Chun-i 吳俊毅 (2022-09-21). "將上百種 App 整合成 3 大訂閱服務，凱鈿在 B2B 市場看到什麼機會？" [Integrating Hundreds of Apps into 3 Major Subscription Services: What Opportunities Does Kdan See in the B2B Market?]. 經理人 [Manager Today] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-01-04. Retrieved 2025-01-04.
  The article notes: "凱鈿行動科技成立於 2009 年，打造上百個 App，其中「PDF Reader」更成為台灣「億」級商用工具軟體；在 2015 年轉型「軟體即服務」（SaaS）廠商，短短數年間，服務和產品累積下載超過 2 億次，全球會員突破 1000 萬，今年更與微軟、LINE 合作，力拚成為台灣下一個新創獨角獸。"
  From Google Translate: "Kdan Mobile Technology was founded in 2009 and has created hundreds of apps, among which "PDF Reader" has become a "billion-dollar" commercial tool software in Taiwan. In 2015, it transformed into a "Software as a Service" (SaaS) manufacturer. In just a few years, Its services and products have been downloaded more than 200 million times, and its global membership has exceeded 10 million. This year, it has cooperated with Microsoft and LINE to become Taiwan's next new unicorn."
Cunard (talk) 13:25, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Datamatics

AfDs for this article:

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Software, and Maharashtra. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – This subject does not seem notable and lacks news coverage from independent reliable sources. Mysecretgarden (talk) 07:21, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:08, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - a Google search brings up many other news articles about them. They are an Indian public company. We can't also just assume all Indians publications are bad. Here are some of the other articles I have found: 1, 2, 3, 4. Shinadamina (talk) 10:05, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shinadamina only link number 3 makes partial sense but still it fails because of CORPTRIV, as it focuses on changes in share price. Please provide a SIRS table. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 13:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can find a good example of a SIRS table in this AfD, which you can easily create by using the following Template:Source assess table. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 13:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete None of the references meet GNG/WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 16:12, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails to meet notability guidelines, as it lacks sufficient independent and reliable secondary sources to establish the company's significance. --Kej Keir (talk) 08:11, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ClickUp

AfDs for this article:

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

Usual issue. I see there was a minor dispute among previous reviewers (MaxnaCarta, Dclemens1971, it is not entirely clear if the passing assessment was made on the basis of sources already cited or those found in a BEFORE) as to the notability of the subject. After reviewing the sources, I am inclined to quite firmly agree with the negative case. In the interest of not edit warring the tag back in, I will be presenting my source assessment here. Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:28, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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?
O'Brien, Ciara (2023-03-08). "ClickUp opens new Dublin office as it eyes further expansion". The Irish Times. Retrieved 2023-11-11. Freeman, Mike (2020-12-15). "ClickUp raises $100M as venture capital continues to flow to local startups". San Diego Union-Tribune. Retrieved 2023-11-11. Meiling, Brittany (2021-06-21). "Billion dollar ClickUp grabs". San Diego Union Tribune. Retrieved 2023-11-09. Matney, Lucas (2020-06-24). "Productivity platform ClickUp raises $35 million from Craft Ventures". TechCrunch. Retrieved 2023-11-11. Harford, Sarah (2021-12-01). "US software company ClickUp to hire 200 at new Dublin HQ". Silicon Republic. Retrieved 2023-11-11. Lunden, Ingrid (2021-10-27). "ClickUp raises $400M at a $4B valuation to expand its all-in-one workplace productivity platform to Europe". TechCrunch. Retrieved 2023-11-11.			The first 6 sources are routine coverage of announcements well within the meaning of WP:CORPTRIV. I do not see the need for a more detailed elaboration at the current stage.
Smith, Paul (2021-10-31). "Atlassian's $4b rival plans Aussie assault after big money funding". Australian Financial Review. Retrieved 2023-11-11.	I was actually part way through a more detailed evaluation on whether there is any secondary content; however, I eventually noticed that this is a sponsored article.
Haranas, Mark. "Tech Layoffs: SaaS Startup ClickUp, Once Valued At $4B, Cuts 10 Percent Of Employees". CRN. Retrieved 2024-12-19.			Mostly announcement and quote material
"A comprehensive list of 2023 & 2024 tech layoffs". Tech Crunch. Archived from the original on 2024-01-19.			I don't think I actually need to say for this one
Preimesberger, Chris J. (2022-04-04). "ClickUp launches Whiteboard to develop WFH analytics". VentureBeat. Retrieved 2023-11-11.	Appears to be 90% quotes from the marketing material or Evans. So negatived.
Dee, Katie (2022-04-26). "ClickUp acquires search platform Slapdash". SD Times. Retrieved 2023-11-11. Freeman, Mike. "San Diego 'unicorn' ClickUp buys Slapdash to bolster productivity software platform". San Diego Union Tribune. Retrieved 18 November 2023.			Again, routine coverage well into CORPTRIV territory.
"ClickUp launches virtual whiteboards tool to help hybrid teams to create fresh ideas for life". RudeBaguette.	Something like 90% of the content about the company appear to be uncritically repeating company marketingese	– Does not appear to be a well-established source, editorial process unclear, leaning towards exclusion on R also.
Vainilavičius, Justinas. "ClickUp launches AI management tool". Cybernews.			Does not really go beyond announcement either
"Introducing ClickUp Brain: The First AI Neural Network for Work". ClickUp. 2024-01-30. Retrieved 2024-02-04.
"ClickUp launches ClickUp Chat with AI-driven features for improved team collaboration". VentureBeat.	Again, this is like 90% quotes. I'm honestly a little surprised any vaguely reputable source is willing to put their name on it without being paid for it but I guess it could be a slow news day.
On to a few sources not currently in the article: "ClickUp wants to be your AI-powered productivity superhub". Fast Company. 2023-02-28. Archived from the original on 2023-03-01. Retrieved 2024-12-19.	This is better than the other ones (e.g. [28]). Nonetheless, the fact that most of the material seems to be based off company announcement and press material leads me to exclude based on ORGIND.		–
"ClickUp Review". PCMAG. 2023-02-28. Archived from the original on 2023-03-01. Retrieved 2024-12-19.	I am again inclined towards a precautionary exclusion due to affiliate marketing and their affect on newsworthiness discussions even if not content.
Cai, Kenrick (2023-02-28). "ClickUp Raises $400 Million At $4 Billion Valuation As Competition Heats Up In Productivity Software". Forbes. Archived from the original on 2023-03-01. Retrieved 2024-12-19.			routine / mostly quotes
There are also a couple of book sources: Unger, Edward (2024). Mastering project management with ClickUp for work and home life balance: a step-by-step implementation and optimization guide to unlocking the power of ClickUp and AI. Packt Publishing. ISBN 978-1-83546-468-7. Heimann, Yvonne (2023-12-12). Mastering the Basics of ClickUp: Get Up and Running in No Time: Easy Project Management Using Repeatable Processes. Amazon Digital Services LLC - Kdp. ISBN 979-8-3759-6420-1.		However, they are obviously self published or published with well-known vanity/POD publishers, and not those with a selective editorial process, and suitable for neither establishing notability nor article content.

I believe the above source assessment is broadly representative of the state of available sourcing, which is still at the moment well short of that required to meet NCORP (multiple sources meeting all four criteria), though I don't expect it to be entirely comprehensive. I would welcome any additional sources. Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:28, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and California. Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:28, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies! I edited this randomly as I was Googling Asana and ClickUp. I saw that it was inaccurate and merely wanted to make it accurate.

There are a lot of articles about ClickUp and I've added them as sources before:

https://www.fastcompany.com/91036895/clickup-most-innovative-companies-2024

https://www.crn.com/news/software/tech-layoffs-saas-startup-clickup-once-valued-at-4b-cuts-10-percent-of-employees

https://tech.co/project-management-software/clickup-vs-trello

https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/clickup

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20240130528352/en/Introducing-ClickUp-Brain-The-First-AI-Neural-Network-for-Work

https://techcrunch.com/2021/10/27/clickup-raises-400m-at-a-4b-valuation-to-expand-its-all-in-one-workplace-productivity-platform-to-europe/

https://www.fastcompany.com/90856730/clickup-project-management-artificial-intelligence

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-15/software-maker-clickup-reaches-1-billion-value-in-funding-round

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/clickup-raises-400m-in-series-c-funding-the-biggest-investment-in-workplace-productivity-history-301409506.html

I would feel incredibly guilty if the article was deleted even though it has been stable for a year now because of my interference. Let me know how I could further help.

Thank you! Modernwoman2021 (talk) 03:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Bloomberg article is a great green source? I saw the perennial sources list and it shows Bloomberg as a good source.

Thank you so much for your assistance! It's my first edit so apologies for my mistake. Modernwoman2021 (talk) 03:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a newer Bloomberg article: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/audio/2024-12-03/clickup-ceo-on-work-platforms-for-an-ai-world-tech-disruptors

and ClickUp's Bloomberg profile: https://www.bloomberg.com/profile/company/1810376D:US

But I still have sources for ClickUp in Yahoo News/Finance here:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/introducing-clickup-brain-first-ai-171400354.html

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/clickup-wants-notion-confluence-ai-162200168.html

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/productivity-platform-clickup-acquires-calendar-094126461.html

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/linkdaddy-backlink-agency-clickup-integration-020400608.html Modernwoman2021 (talk) 03:54, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's nothing to do with you Modernwoman2021, you can rest assured that the article had been on my list now for a while, it just took me a while to get around to it, and deletion on Wikipedia won't mean the content would be lost permenantly (you can request it be emailed and reuse it per the CC BY-SA licence) just that it is deemed unsuitable for inclusion at the current time. Alpha3031 (t • c) 08:42, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As for the new sources that you found, would you be willing to pick out the best three at meeting the 4 required criteria (WP:SIRS) to establish suitability for inclusion on Wikipedia (WP:NCORP) and explain how they meet the criteria in your opinion? I will be looking at them later when I have time regardless, and you don't have to put them into a table like I have (that takes a lot of effort IMO and probably isn't worth it).

All four criteria must be met by the core sources that you pick: the sources used to establish inclusion must be in-depth (there must be a significant amount of content, and it must not be trivial coverage, which has some examples listed here, though the list is not exhaustive); independent (meaning we can only count things that are not quotes or taken from press material, or appear to be taken from press material, and the source must be free from any actual or perceived conflicts of interest); reliable (has a reputation for fact checking and accuracy, probably the easiest one since most news organisations are considered reliable enough); and secondary (the source must include original analysis, interpretation or synthesis by the source, it cannot be simple statements of fact, it must interpret those facts for us to be able to use it on Wikipedia). Alpha3031 (t • c) 08:58, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Alpha3031!

I appreciate the effort in explaining to me what the criterias are! They are incredibly helpful :D

But since this is just my first time, I added more than three sources, I couldn't really determine the top three ones so these are what I have:

Source	URL	Reason
Inc.	https://www.inc.com/magazine/202210/paul-kix/clickup-zeb-evans-dying-to-succeed-2022.html	This is an article about ClickUp's founder, Zeb Evans that is published by an independent third-party source on Inc., a reliable and secondary news platorm.
London Loves Business	https://londonlovesbusiness.com/businesses-are-optimistic-about-growth-with-85-per-cent-expecting-growth-in-2023/	This article is in-depth but is more like the writer getting ClickUp's opinion on growth? But it is independent, reliable and secondary, though.
Yahoo Finance	https://finance.yahoo.com/news/asana-rival-clickup-hits-1b-120128290.html	This is an article all about ClickUp's growth published on Yahoo Finance by a third-party so I believe it meets all the criteria :D (Please correct if I'm wrong.)
Bloomberg	https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-15/software-maker-clickup-reaches-1-billion-value-in-funding-round	Same article as the above but this is published in Bloomberg, another reliable and secondary source.
Bloomberg	https://www.bloomberg.com/news/audio/2024-12-03/clickup-ceo-on-work-platforms-for-an-ai-world-tech-disruptors	This is a very recent article on Bloomberg about ClickUp. It's actually a podcast episode where ClickUp's founder, Zeb Evans, talked about ClickUp and its entrance to the AI industry on Bloomberg's official podcast.
Business Insider	https://www.businessinsider.com/clickup-building-seasoned-executive-team-servicenow-zscaler-growth-2022-10	This is an article by a third-party regarding ClickUp's new executive team published in Business Insider.

I really hope any of these can help!

Once again, thank you for the very detailed guide, it is incredible and super helpful in teaching me how to become a proper editor in Wikipedia :D

Thank you and I hope you have a great day!

Modernwoman2021 (talk) 11:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Didn't see the ping originally, but yes, I was the new page reviewer who did a WP:BEFORE when seeing the notability tag during new page review and decided it passed NCORP. Still think so. While I appreciate the nominator's incredibly thorough and detailed source assessment, I would also count this Fast Company profile as independent sigcov. Meanwhile, there are several editorially independent and in-depth product reviews that would count toward NCORP, including MarketWatch Guides, TechRadar, and PCMag. It's a marginal case but I think it crosses the line to an NCORP pass. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:25, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 11:36, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

re the new sources, I initially struck the FastCo "Most Innovative Companies of 2024" article because it didn't meet ORGDEPTH, but it's worth noting it also fails ORGIND since FastCo charges a few hundred dollars for companies to be considered for the list. I'm really not comfortable accepting reviews with affiliate links for the product being reviewed either Dclemens1971, (even if the actual content is unaffected, there is the expectation that such coverage is less selective and more routine given the direct conflict of interest) which means striking MarketWatch and PCMag sources, as well as the tech.co one from Modernwoman2021. I am aware that there isn't a strong consensus on actually doing so in all cases though, so I would be willing to kick it up to WP:RSN for a determination on this specific case if challenged (either on some or all of those three sources), but unless we go for that, when there is any doubt ORGIND advises to exercise caution and exclude. As for TechRadar, I'm not sure it meets WP:PRODUCTREV, much of it seems very generic "copied from the feature list/marketing material" like prose, which also raises questions about the independence of the content (as opposed to the functional independnece concerns with the other sources): responsive, visually appealing look we enjoyed when testing the platform. is really the only bit that stands out as indicating personal experience with the software, and even there it fails to provide broader context or draw comparisons. There is a section on "the competition" but I would give it at best a partial pass, and it's the only source that I would do so for so far. Alpha3031 (t • c) 08:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As for the other sources from Modernwoman2021:

The Inc. article is mostly about Evans. I haven't really evaluated whether I'd think it met the intellectual independence part of WP:ORGIND, but there isn't enough coverage actually about the company itself for it to meet WP:CORPDEPTH (see § Significant coverage of the company itself: a biography of a CEO is a significant coverage for the Wikipedia article on the product or the CEO, but not a significant coverage on the company (unless the article or biography devotes significant attention to the company itself).).

For LondonLovesBusiness, it's not clear to me that it's a sufficiently well established news organisation to be considered generally reliable, especially with the byline. I don't see any indication of the editorial process. In any case, content supplied by the organisation in question would definitely fail intellectual independence, and there is again little to no coverage of the company itself.

The Yahoo Finance / Benzinga article is a routine article which is the standard fare that gets published for essentially every funding round that happens, it's a type of article that's explicitly excluded by WP:CORPDEPTH.

The next Bloomberg article is the same. As for the podcast appearance, comments by Evans would again be excluded by the intellectual independence part of WP:ORGIND

Announcements of hiring, promotion, or departure of personnel like Business Insider again falls under WP:CORPROUTINE.

For the sources not in the table of 5 sources, ignoring the Business Wire and PR Newswire news releases (WP:ORGIND, obviously) the first block of sources (with the exception of tech.co) are in the previous source assessment table so I'll refrain from repeating myself (click show to expand). tech.co on the other hand, as mentioned, has functional independence concerns due to affiliate marketing, though these are something I'd be willing to raise with RSN case by case.

In the second block, Bloomberg profiles are pretty much database entries. This one has three sentences with thirty something words, but even longer profiles are rarely considered sufficient for WP:CORPDEPTH. The first and last Yahoo Finance articles are actually also press releases (Business Wire and Newsfile) and the two TechCrunch articles seem to be routine announcements of a new product feature and M&A activity respectively. Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:24, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, my overall impression is that this is a company that has done a lot of the usual SPIP work, it's done all the right startup things, but overall, it is still too soon for us to have an article on it on Wikipedia. There is certainly a lot to work through, and I do appreciate everyone for chipping in with their efforts (also appreciate the confirmation from Dclemens1971 that the assessment of a NCORP pass was from a BEFORE and not from the sources already in the article). At the moment though, my answer to whether it is possible for the subject to meet NCORP is still unfortunately in the negative. Happy new year though, everyone! Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:33, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I agree with the very thorough analysis by Alpha301 above, none of the sources meet GNG/ORG criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 15:49, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Undetectable.ai

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

Does not meet WP:ORGCRITE, no WP:CORPDEPTH upon closer inspection, it is clearly a WP:FAILCORP

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:17, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Just noting that the nominator here is User:Moondust534.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: A lot of text and references were excised in the fortnight prior to this AfD nomination (old version here). While the likes of OK Magazine are unlikely to provide much for WP:CORPDEPTH, others, including paywalled journal articles, may provide more for evaluation. AllyD (talk) 13:38, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NCORP. No reliable sources that demonstrate significant coverage. Madeleine (talk) 01:39, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Added a bunch of sources back. A simple Google Search seems to demonstrate notability as well as copy cat companies. Here are some significant sources: https://radaronline.com/p/alan-from-mighty-med-condemns-ai-cheats-then-explains-how-to-cheat-with-ai/ https://hollywoodlife.com/2024/03/20/celebs-are-using-undetectable-ai/ https://knewz.com/new-ai-mimics-real-writing-no-one-can-tell/ https://www.techtudo.com.br/dicas-e-tutoriais/2023/10/undetectableai-como-saber-se-um-texto-foi-escrito-pelo-chatgpt-edsoftwares.ghtml https://gritdaily.com/devan-leos-talks-about-diversity-and-inclusion-in-ai/

2603:8001:1DF0:7250:84F:1F8A:9022:3470 (talk) 00:02, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also worth noting that User talk:Moondust534 is a new user, who has been in trouble for inappropriate closures before. This company is very controversial, and is the first I could find that created an adversarial AI technology, and seems the concept will be an important note in AI history. 2603:8001:1DF0:7250:84F:1F8A:9022:3470 (talk) 00:14, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Worth noting that @Moondust534 seems to be a new user with nine edits, and appears to have vandalized the page, removing a myriad of sources before flagging this page for deletion. It seems clear the user does not have a coherent grasp on WP policy, and furthermore, @Moondust534 seems to have intentionally removed sources before nominating, as noted by @AllyD

2603:8001:1DF0:7250:84F:1F8A:9022:3470 (talk) 00:25, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So what? Who vandalized the page? I do not agree. Wikipedia rules say to remove sources that do not meet the RS requirements before nomination the page. Moondust534 (talk) 00:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: BBC article and Bartneck study provide significant coverage. This is sufficient for a Keep. HyperAccelerated (talk) 07:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on existing coverage such as Scoop, Hollywood Life, THIS and BBC.Shinadamina (talk) 03:44, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: With doubts being cast on nominator and the only editor arguing for Delete also being very new to the project, I'd like to hear from some experienced editors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The sources like BBC, OK! Magazine, Knews, and independent research seem to meet sigcov and seem to meet WP:CORPDEPTH given the research and media coverage. I did a search on Google Scholar and found new research of the software:
1. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sayim-Aktay/publication/381110349_THE_RISK_OF_ARTIFICIAL_INTELLIGENCE_IN_EDUCATION_AND_AI_DETECTION_TOOLS/links/665d6979479366623a3a6415/THE-RISK-OF-ARTIFICIAL-INTELLIGENCE-IN-EDUCATION-AND-AI-DETECTION-TOOLS.pdf
2. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/02537176241247934
3. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/GKMC-03-2024-0133/full/html Also seems they were even written about in a book recently too: https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=1TM0EQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=undetectable.ai&ots=Xl-pKUarG6&sig=Ib2-scy64I2IF-QxJsQhb_QH9Us#v=onepage&q=undetectable.ai&f=false I see sources in Portuguese and from the Philipenes, UK, and US media which all make a strong case for notability. I look at edit history as well, as others previously mentioned, found it strange the sources were in fact deleted without proper explanation just before page nominated for AfD

Taksoh17 (talk) 15:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note, this is bluntly promotional. Hollywood Life, Scoop Moondust534 (talk) 00:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, none of the sources are related to the category to demonstrate notability. WP:CORPTRIV WP:ORGTRIV There is no independent in-depth coverage of the company. The main source reveled by Google search is https://www.reddit.com/r/WritingWithAI/comments/1g3198i/undetectable_ai_review_is_it_legit/

Self-made "academic research", not reflected in any media looks beyond doubtful. Sources added about accolades or impact do not provide in-depth coverage or any vendee of receiving any industry awards or recognition.

"Usage and impact"

In November 2023, EarthWeb used Undetectable.ai alongside GPTZero to analyze celebrity apology statements.thechainsaw.com
https://hollywoodlife.com/2024/03/20/celebs-are-using-undetectable-ai/
In January 2024, SourceFed announced plans to use Undetectable.ai for AI content detection. sourcefed.com
A January 2024 report listed Undetectable AI as the 35th most visited AI software in 2023 out of 150 analyzed.https://www.flexos.work/learn/generative-ai-top-150

Moondust534 (talk) 00:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from the edition section that got my attention. The section about the criminal records was removed several times. The creator of the article seems to be blocked 7 times, with sock puppet accounts. The no account edits made specifically on this page by 2603:8001:1DF0:7250:84F:1F8A:9022:3470 are questionable.

cur prev 13:10, 9 April 2024 Comintell talk contribs m 11,165 bytes −1,489 Reverted 1 edit by Sesame119 (talk) to last revision by Comintell undo thank Tags: Twinkle Undo
curprev 03:47, 9 April 2024 Sesame119 talk contribs 12,654 bytes +1,489 I created a controversies section, partially taken from an existing page on actor Devan Leos who is also the CMO of Undetectable AI using sources that were already approved for that page. I also added to this the criminal history of the founder and CEO Christian Perry and provided the court record as a source.undothank Tag: Reverted
- cur prev 20:00, 8 April 2024 Sesame119 talk contribs 12,115 bytes +950 →Reception and analysis: I added a subsection on two of the senior executives involved with this company including its founder. It is notable that two executive officers have a history of felonious behavior. I presented this information in an unbiased way and it is simply to inform the public about the background of two people deeply involved in the development. undo thank

Moondust534 (talk) 00:45, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I also got hot a hostile message on my page demanding me to withdraw the nomination from 2603:8001:1DF0:7250:84F:1F8A:9022:3470. While nomination is a fair discussion, and everyone is open to contribute. A similar message, written in the same style by the sock puppet Comintell can be found on the page of editor Sesame119 who raised concerns about the criminal records of the individuals mentioned in the article. Moondust534 (talk) 01:49, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Moondust, please contribute in good faith. 2603:8001:1DF0:7250:F5E6:A8A5:A9C1:45E5 (talk) 02:25, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]