Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colloquy (company)
The overarching standard for  established by  is that "A company, corporation, organization, school, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources." I now consider whether the sources presented meet that standard. Per , "trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability." Consider each source presented by Northamerica1000 in turn. The New York Times article is clearly incidental coverage. The article is about the study; Colloquy is mentioned in passing in one sentence and then never discussed. Colloquy receives more coverage in The Star, but is still not the focus of the article. The same goes for the Promo Magazine article. In all articles the focus is the survey produced by Colloquy, and per , "an article on the product may be appropriate, and notability of the company itself is not inherited as a result."  All coverage in these sources is incidental. Now I consider sources presented by LuciferWildCat. As SL93 pointed out, the vast majority of search results are press releases. Per , we cannot accept press releases as . If this company does indeed meet the standard set out by , why have we not seen coverage in multiple independent sources in which the company itself is the focus? I have yet to see a single instance of coverage for the company itself that is both significant and independent
— User:Sailing, 02:46, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:ORG||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:PRODUCT||WP:INDEPENDENT||WP:V||WP:ORG (Wikipedia:Notability)