GENIVI Alliance: Attempted COI editing.  Written like an advertisement.  Andre 🚐 18:14, 9 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Companies ,  and United States of America .  Andre 🚐 18:14, 9 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:10, 9 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep lots of good refs out there from Google News .  I'm on the road with little time to list them properly.  Here's a sample : [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] EBSCO via the Wikipedia Library - many are recycled press releases but there WP:RS as well (may or may not be sufficient for notability) Google Books also has references to meet notability The article may seem promotional but this is a nonprofit standards setting group using Linux for automotive operating systems.  Participants are: "GM, PSA/Peugeot-Citroen, Renault-Nissan, Hyundai, BMW and others, and more than a dozen global suppliers, including Robert Bosch, Continental, Denso, Aisin and Valeo."  We need this article - people are going to be looking for information.  Article needs new title - organization is now the "Connected Vehicle Systems Alliance".  ( press release ) -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 04:49, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Above references appear quite trivial passing mentions and WP:ROUTINE press release type info.  Andre 🚐 04:54, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Nope, the links I gave are "trivial passing mentions and WP:ROUTINE press release type", especially after you read each one.  These are in-depth articles: [12] [13] The other articles I cite give several paragraphs.  Less than a passing mention but not deep dives.  Collectively they add up to an analysis of GENIVI as well as its competitors Books are not press releases, at least not in my country.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 07:13, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Suggest you read WP:ROUTINE more thoroughly as it appears to cover all of this comfortably including those "in-depth" articles which are both basically press clippings.  Every book mention is trivial as well.  Andre 🚐 17:54, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per numerous references in scholarly papers.   Please see [14] and connected edit request placed on talk page to improve article with better sourcing.  TR?? Wiki5 ( talk ) 20:13, 16 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment This user has a disclosed WP:COI (see their contribution history).  Sincerely, Novo Tape (She/Her) My Talk Page 20:16, 16 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting.  I'd iike to see more comments or a source analysis on the recently discovered sources.  Also, since Soft Deletion is not available, there will need to be stronger support for a Deletion than the nomination statement.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  20:29, 16 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep - I just implemented an extensive COI edit request made by the above user, and added their COI on the talk page.  The article has been almost completely rewritten, but may not include all the sources that were discussed above.  The main difference seems to be that there are several research papers based on the organization's work that were added as references.  I don't have full access to them and can't tell how extensive the coverage is, but the summaries shown here [15] reference the organization's work.  I also don't have access to the books that were discussed above, but if anyone else does and wants to verify whether they can be used to improve the sourcing, I'd consider revising my vote to a regular keep.  STEM info ( talk ) 23:10, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: To discuss the edits referenced in STEMinfo's ! vote Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 21:53, 23 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - there is a lot of coverage of this subject per A. B., lots of primary stuff to filter but should be more than enough in my opinion.  At least some of the studies indicated above look independent and seem to cover technical details in depth.  More references on ProQuest, again some primary material but not all, which should further support notability.  I think a subject of this kind, being a cooperative between major industry competitors which are themselves all uncontroversially notable, is a good target for inclusion on the encyclopedia.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 05:07, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Article may need to be moved however per the subject's change in current name, which can be discussed on its talk page.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 05:09, 29 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.

Discussion outcome: keep