Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yubi

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:32, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yubi

[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)

Non-notable finance company, sourcing is in non-RS or simply funding announcements. Oaktree b (talk) 23:19, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and India. Oaktree b (talk) 23:19, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 02:00, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tamil Nadu-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:56, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Wikipedia does not like fundraising or interview coverage but what is there should be enough in aggregate to support in my opinion. - Indefensible (talk) 18:01, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We don't analyse sources "in aggregate" as per WP:SIRS which says that *each* source must meet *all* the criteria. HighKing⁺⁺ 14:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 16 August 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. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 14:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'm not seeing the depth of coverage and independence required by WP:ORGCRIT in the available sources. Actualcpscm^{scrutinize, talk} 19:25, 23 August 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.