Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Papaya Global

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. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 05:14, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Papaya Global

[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)

Not meeting CORP. all sources are funding announcements or PR pieces. They are briefly mentioned in various articles such as [1], but they don't have significant coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 21:29, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and Israel. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It appears to be a big company making a lot of money, but the sources are mostly PR. Unless new sources can be found, this company does not appear to be notable enough. JoseJan89 (talk) 10:28, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, this company is not notable. There are many Israeli software companies and this company isn't one of them. Benbaruch (talk) 10:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteOfir michael (talk) 11:18, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Eladkarmel (talk) 09:07, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Viki.coo (talk) 14:04, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable and well-sourced to Globes, Haaretz, Business Insider, The Marker, all reliable sources that would not waste their time or space on an unworthy company. Moreover, the CEO is a woman, which certainly makes it stand out in the crowd. Do not understand the rush to delete a solid Wikipedia entry.--Geewhiz (talk) 19:42, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The company got plenty of in-depth coverage in major media outlets, especially in Israel, but also abroad. Tzahy (talk) 21:13, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The article subject doesn’t meet WP:NCORP. While there are sources, those sources effectively amount to PR material and do not satisfy WP:INDEPTH or WP:SIGCOV. Shawn Teller (talk) 22:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets NCORP per above. Sizable international company. Bought out and incorporated AZIMO that was recently kept in another AfD. While AfDs can be very useful for new companies, this is not the case here. There are additional articles on Hewiki. Delete opinions clearly mischaracterize Israeli newspapers. Where they characterize at all. Much tends to be JUSTAVOTE and should be discounted. gidonb (talk) 13:48, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:53, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "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. In plain English, this means that 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. If it isn't *clearly* showing independent content then it fails ORGIND. Here, the references (including those in The haaretz.com, etc) are simply regurgitating information provided by the company and have no "Independent Content" in the form of independent analysis/fact checking/opinion/etc. It would be helpful if the Keep !voters above identified specific paragraphs/sections within specific sources which they claim meet the criteria. HighKing⁺⁺ 11:24, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:21, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per HighKing's reasoning. MrsSnoozyTurtle 04:13, 30 March 2023 (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.