Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vectra AI

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The result was Withdrawn (non-admin closure) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:06, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vectra AI[edit]

[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)

Lack of notability per WP:NCORP. Wikipedia is not a business directory. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:27, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, Internet, and California. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ^{(work / talk)} 03:04, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the article used to be much longer, note revision 1139512372. Most of the material removed was promotional in some form. I don't see any references that would support a keep vote, but I haven't checked them all. Walt Yoder (talk) 04:57, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at all of the references there' The last one ("Magic Quadrant for Intrusion Detection and Prevention Systems") is arguably suitable, including about 3 paragraphs of content on the company. The rest are all useless, and more than one good source is needed to write an article anyway. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:35, 24 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!} 07:07, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Analyst reports such as Garner, Forrester, etc, meet GNG/NCORP criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 18:33, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but there's only one of them (which I will admit I missed in the WP:REFBOMBing) and don't you need two such sources to establish notability? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:45, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is true you need multiple sources. I'm suspicious of some of the reports put forward by some research agencies where it is difficult to identify the author or where they just don't look right. Also, I found reports mentioned on "Market Research Future" but this website is registered on Wikipedia's Blacklist. So while this "GLOBAL AND UNITED STATES INTRUSION DETECTION AND PREVENTION SOFTWARE MARKET SIZE, STATUS AND FORECAST 2021-2027" report by Kingpin Market Research is ... difficult ... to validate, this "Intrusion Detection and Prevention Systems Software Market Analysis 2022" by Stratagem is probably OK. Once you go searching though, there appears to be sufficient reports and all in all - unless someone can point to a reason to discount these references - I think there's enough here to say that there exists sufficient sources that meet the criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 11:12, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:14, 1 April 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.