Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C & C Market Research: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 13:17, 20 March 2008

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. Clear consensus that article fails to verify notability in spite of good-faith efforts to locate reliable secondary sources. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:17, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

C & C Market Research

Spammy unsourced article about non-notable research firm; suspect COI from the tone of IP remarks on talk page; fails WP:COMPANY Orange Mike | Talk 13:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

dude every remark on the talk page by an ip is me, as i cant login to every computer when i access it, all the time, if wikipedia doesnt make me (see: waste of time)) 70.178.71.123 (talk) 01:03, 14 March 2008 (UTC)karthic420[reply]

Delete. Per the discussion on the article talk page, even if their work is confidential, their success and favorable reception from their clientele should stand out notably somewhere, somehow. It does not. Kill it. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 13:41, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. This article about a non-consumer research firm is referenced only to directories. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 13:55, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above; I've seen these guys in a few shopping malls but they don't appear to be the subject of any third party coverage. Possibly A7 for a non-notable company. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 13:59, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- response - Cobalt put a notability tag on 'em; no help. Prodded it, and one of the two s.p.a.s who WP:OWN this removed it; so it was taken to AfD. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment. It was also speedied by Pedro (talk · contribs) on 08:07, March 12, 2008;but then he restored it at my request because I wasn't done trying to find resources for it. I could not. See History. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 14:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article as written is an ad. The only sources provided are themselves and a couple of directories. No indication of any reliable, verifiable, or independent coverage. DarkAudit (talk) 14:21, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails a reasonable look at WP:N.Golgofrinchian (talk) 16:14, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (unless sources found) - I tried too. We gave it an honest shot but nobody has found evidence of notability.Wikidemo (talk) 18:33, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep of course, since i created the article, but already one person above said they know who we are, and are in thier local shopping mall. One random guy from half a dozen replies. That's already notable. Spam/ad appearance has been removed, and in response to the guy saying we're a non-consumer research firm, that's blatently false, C & C is a market research field service firm, (by defination that is consumer research data collection) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.178.71.123 (talk) 22:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- See the user's comments on the article talk page. Karthic420 (talk · contribs) and 70.178.71.123 (talk · contribs) are the same person; no evidence of deceptive sockpuppetry found. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 13:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification: by "non-consumer" I meant, not that they don't do consumer research, but that the service is not marketed to a mass consumer base outside of the group of businesses that conduct market research. End-user consumer products and services are likelier to be notable than products and services marketed chiefly to other businesses. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment one guy going "I know who they are" is not an acceptable assertion of notability. You need multiple, reliable, verifiable sources that are independent of the subject per both WP:N for notability, and WP:RS for those sources. The article does not meet those guidelines. DarkAudit (talk) 14:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It's just an ad. Rien (talk\stalk) 14:53, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Nom. Paste (talk) 10:57, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. —Pixelface (talk) 16:02, 13 March 2008 (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.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
-===[[C &amp; C Market Research]]===
+:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this page.''
-{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|O}}
+<!--Template:Afd top
+Note:  If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]].  When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
+The result was  '''delete'''. Clear consensus that article fails to [[WP:V|verify]] [[WP:N|notability]] in spite of good-faith efforts to locate [[WP:RS|reliable secondary sources]]. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 13:17, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
+===[[C &amp; C Market Research]]===
 :{{la|C &amp; C Market Research}} (<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:C &amp; C Market Research|wpReason={{urlencode:AfD discussion: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C &amp; C Market Research]]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C &amp; C Market Research|View AfD]])</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2008 March 13#{{anchorencode:C &amp; C Market Research}}|View log]])</noinclude>
 Spammy unsourced article about non-notable research firm; suspect COI from the tone of IP remarks on talk page; fails [[WP:COMPANY]] [[User:Orangemike|<font color="darkorange">Orange Mike</font>]]  &#x007C;  [[User talk:Orangemike|<font color="orange">Talk</font>]] 13:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
@@ Line 23: / Line 28: @@
 ----
 *<small>'''Note''':  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Business|list of Business-related deletion discussions]].  </small><small>—[[User:Pixelface|Pixelface]] ([[User talk:Pixelface|talk]]) 16:02, 13 March 2008 (UTC)</small>
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>