Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canopy Simulations

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. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 00:51, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Canopy Simulations

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

One good source but otherwise fails WP:NCORP. Nothing promising on a DuckDuckGo/Google search. talk to !dave 11:46, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Additional detail has been added to support notable achievements Rmjowett (talk) 13:55, 23 March 2018 (UTC) contribs) 12:52, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 13:13, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 13:13, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – At this time. A company, just three years old, and though has some interesting contributions to the industry, has not quite risen to the level of Encyclopedic noteworthiness. Maybe in a few more years. Good luck to them.ShoesssS ^Talk 13:45, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The software represents a historic step in the way we deal with the energy and thermal constrains in the dawn of the electric vehicle era Rmjowett (talk) 13:58, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You need to show how the company meets WP:NCORP. Read it in full. talk to !dave 14:00, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support Shoessss. I am unable to find further 3rd party information verifying that this represents notable technology. In the fullness of time, hopefully this information will surface into the public domain. Rmjowett (talk) 14:27, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries Rmjowett, that's fair enough. It's up to you, but you can put the article out of its misery by placing {{db-g7}} on the top of it. Cheers, talk to !dave 16:21, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. 5 refs - 3 primary, 1 doesn't mention them, 1 weak. New article already speedy deleted, COI tag, notability not established. Szzuk (talk) 17:27, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete sourcing isn't good as per Szzuk and difficult to find reliable sources in a search. SportingFlyer talk 05:24, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable company - maybe WP:TOOSOON -time will tell. But not now, I'm afraid, if there aren't sufficient sources to demonstrate how our criteria are met. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:45, 28 March 2018 (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.