Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Business: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:50, 24 June 2010

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Business. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Business|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Business. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Business

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 keep. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:55, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Siemens PLM Software

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page does not show notability, and has no references. It seems like it is nothing besides an advert for the company. Tootitnbootit (talk) 17:32, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep: WP:SK. The topic is notable. In fact, it was the topic of an article today in Fortune: "Chrysler's engineering software shift: The automaker is embracing engineering software from Siemens where it once used Dassault. A case of open vs. closed?" As stated here, Siemens PLM is "one of the biggest suppliers in the PLM market", which was purchased in 2007 for $3.5 billion. Yes, the article needs cleanup and references, but it appears salvagable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justin W Smith (talk • contribs) 20:42, June 23, 2010
- The current article needs more sources to prove notability. If sources like these were added then I would agree that we should keep the article. Currently it talks mostly about its products with a bit of history that is all unsourced or self-sourced. As of now I believe its unacceptable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tootitnbootit (talk • contribs) 20:46, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Please read Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies) again. It says, "Notability requires only that these necessary sources exist, not that the sources have already been named in the article.". Justin W Smith ^talk/_stalk 20:51, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - I understand that, but when you type in the name in Google it only shows press releases. Which are not considered necessary sources by WP:COMPANY. The Forbes article you showed does not show up in the search. That article would be a correct source of notability.Tootitnbootit (talk) 21:01, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - I would also like to add that you found something that I didnt. Which is why this discussion board is in place, correct? I agree, if there is a source like Forbes that this article should stay.Tootitnbootit (talk) 21:05, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. —Justin W Smith ^talk/_stalk 21:29, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. —Justin W Smith ^talk/_stalk 21:29, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I found this article extremely useful and informative when searching for background info about this company just now. To me, it doesn't read like an advertisement at all, most of the content concerns the company's history, and it is similar to articles I've read about other companies. I have no links to or interest in this company or its competitors.Kiwi Jake (talk) 22:22, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: notable without question. Dewritech (talk) 08:57, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
First let me say that I am employed by Siemens and used to work in the PLM Software business unit (I am now in the Industry Automation division responsible for PL and 3 other business units). If the main issue is references, I am sure we can find them, but I do need your advice: we have specifically avoided doind anything to any of our wikiepdia articles. We let them be whatever the community outside of Siemens PLM Software decides they should be. If we have the references, what is the right way to add them without creating the perception that we are tampering with the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aakelley (talk • contribs) 16:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The policy on this is covered (officially) by WP:COI or (unofficially) by WP:EXPERT. In short, if you have a potential conflict-of-interest (COI) with content on wikipedia (e.g., an article about you, or a company you work for), you should generally specify these potential COIs on your talk page. And then, when you see changes that should be made to articles for which you may have a COI, you should recommend your change on the article's talk page. In this case, your talk page is User talk:Aakelley, and the article's talk page is Talk:Siemens PLM Software. Justin W Smith ^talk/_stalk 16:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I knew about the use of the article's talk page for COIs, but had not read / heard about the specification of COIs on your personal talk page. I will add that now and add the references to the Siemens PLM Article talk page once I compile them. Thanks for the pointers.Aakelley (talk) 17:54, 6 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aakelley (talk • contribs) 17:53, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - I said it wrong; declaring your potential COI should probably be on your user page, but not necessarily your user talk page. WP:COI makes it fairly clear. In any case, I'm glad I could help. Justin W Smith ^talk/_stalk 15:24, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - only argument for deletion seems to be WP:RUBBISH. There's enough significant coverage in reliable independent sources for this to meet WP:GNG. Claritas § 18:02, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - notable. Acquisition news can be found from http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/07/588 and http://www.manufacturing-executive.com/news/read/Siemens__UGS_Is_the_Merger_Working_32562. Seakskyk (talk) 8:57, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Would someone please close this AFD. It's been open for several weeks now, and I think the consensus is clear. Justin W Smith ^talk/_stalk 14:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 10:02, 24 July 2010 (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.

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. extransit (talk) 07:10, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NewTech Infosystems Inc.

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't find significant coverage for this company. Joe Chill (talk) 23:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I see no refs, all first-page ghits are to WP, or the company's website, and the article sounds like advertisement. A likely candidate for G11, methinks. -- Alexf^(talk) 02:01, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - More than 2.5 years on WP and no independent sources have been added. I find lots of recycled press releases via a Google search, but no significant coverage in reliable sources. P. D. Cook ^{Talk to me!} 02:12, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I started this page when I got price quote for this company product. So this is real company with very small footprint on the web. Why it is so I don't know. see http://www.nticorp.com/en/us/company/about_overview.asp User:Abune (talk) 02:53, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't doubt that the company exists, but can you explain how it meets the criteria spelled out in WP:CORP? P. D. Cook ^{Talk to me!} 03:16, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:34, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:35, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia is not a directory for software businesses; the field is crowded, and commercial businesses generally need to show some kind of historical, technical, or cultural significance. Nothing seems to indicate that this business has reached that level, though it surely exists. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:39, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, the importance consideration here is not whether a company exists (and this one does), it's whether it's notable. If it has a "very small footprint on the web", that means that it most likely fails WP:CORP, and indeed, I can find very little independent coverage of the company anywhere. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 03:19, 27 June 2010 (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.

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. T. Canens (talk) 23:18, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Green zebra adventures

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Creator removed speedy G11 nomination. Article has since been edited several times but still makes no claims to notability or even WP:GNG. Essentially promotional in tone and content. Fenix down (talk) 21:21, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - As per nom Codf1977 (talk) 21:28, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete - No indication of significance whatsoever -clearly falls under A7. Suggest an admin delete it now per WP:SNOWBALL. Thparkth (talk) 01:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete Promotional. No notability shown. Peridon (talk) 19:53, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. GregJackP Boomer!
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:26, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the nomination. —JonathanDP81 (Talk | contribs) 17:34, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, thinly-veiled advertisement for a non-notable tour company. Glenfarclas (talk) 19:12, 28 June 2010 (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.

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. Rough consensus indicates that the article does not meet the relevant notability guidelines. –MuZemike 22:29, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Liquid Technologies

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable software company, Fails WP:CORP - the only coverage is not significant, most of it reproductions of press releases. Also adding XML Studio it's main product, article is promotional and also lack of coverage (even less than the links about may indicate as there looks like there are two products called XML Studio) so fails WP:GNG Codf1977 (talk) 21:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Also note strongly promotional tone: Liquid XML Data Binding has grown in popularity due to its support from all the major languages and its ability to deal with complex schemas.... The free edition is extremely popular in schools and universities, its split code/diagram views speed the learning of the complex XSD standard.... - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 03:13, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 03:13, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Nominator needs to read the guideline that an article isn't spam merely because its subject is a commercial body. Copyediting would be useful and if the time of copyeditors wasn't continually wasted in farcical AfDs, it might even get done. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but XML Studio reads like a sales brochure, product lacks any form of significant coverage and as a result fails WP:GNG, as for the company again no significant coverage, falis WP:GNG - I am unable to see what any amount of Copyediting could help with the notability of both the company and it's software. Codf1977 (talk) 12:18, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:22, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Very little independent coverage so fails WP:CORP and WP:GNG as far as I can tell. Alzarian16 (talk) 10:26, 30 June 2010 (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.

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 keep. needs some work Tone 19:22, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SiSoftware

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non Notable company - only claim to significance is it's product "Sandra". Codf1977 (talk) 19:53, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this company. Joe Chill (talk) 00:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Also obvious advertising for yet another business to business back-office tech company: a provider of computer analysis, diagnostic and benchmarking software. The flagship product, known as "SANDRA", was launched in 1997 and has become notably popular in its field..... - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:37, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. SiSoft should be an instantly recognizable name to anyone who has opened a computing magazine at some point during the past decade. The article needs improving. Affinemesh94464 (talk) 08:59, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Move to SiSoft SANDRA. Their flagship product is notable in fact, however, I don't think the company deserves an article of its own for a single notable product. A redirect to an article on the product seems acceptable, too. Nageh (talk) 13:26, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 15:00, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and cleanup. Their flagship product is a well-known tool used for system diagnostics. Some Wiki Editor (talk) 18:05, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As per Some Wiki Editor. Also 2,070,000 hits on Google. --Rockstonetalk to me! 03:48, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and flesh out with information about their flagship product "Sandra". Coverage is not particularly in-depth, but is counterbalanced by the breadth. A google book search provides a lot sources that provide small writeups including Leo Laporte declaring it one his favourites. -- Whpq (talk) 19:43, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. For several years Sisoft-Sandra was one of those tools installed on my one or other pc. I don't know if Sisoft or Sandra is more worthy of an article but there is certainly some cultural and historical significance here.Pxtreme75 (talk) 20:01, 2 July 2010 (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.

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. -- Cirt (talk) 21:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Juice Lounge

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A chain with only seven outlets after five years trading. Two sources, the first of which is clearly taken from a press release, the second is far from being a dispassionate review (the author appears to be a True Believer in kook health food, note comments on "memory booster"). Guy (Help!) 18:14, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - not enough independent coverage to meet WP:GNG or WP:CORP--Sodabottle (talk) 06:39, 29 June 2010 (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.

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. -- Cirt (talk) 04:29, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Softwaremining

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable corporation Orange Mike | Talk 14:53, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this company. Joe Chill (talk) 17:00, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:20, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:20, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Promotional piece for yet another business to business back-office tech firm: specializing in transformation tools for the modernization of legacy COBOL applications. SoftwareMining's modernization approach is to help clients move their COBOL Software Applications to a maintainable Java or C# code base, thus removing dependencies on a diminishing pool of legacy resources .... - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:39, 23 June 2010 (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.

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. -- Cirt (talk) 01:00, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quickcart

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Software for creating on-line shops. No evidence of notability. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Entirely unreferenced. Sub-minimal claim to historic, technical, or cultural significance: the very first Shopping Cart code ever written using the Cold Fusion development language on the Internet. Obvious advertising: the code was completely overhauled to take advantage of new technologies.... . It has taken over 3 years and untold man hours to design and build.... . It has taken over 3 years and untold man hours to design and build.... contains a step-by-step walk-through of how to setup your store. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:25, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:25, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as per nom Codf1977 (talk) 17:27, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 02:01, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete NN software. JBsupreme (talk) ✄ ✄ ✄ 03:20, 25 June 2010 (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.

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. -- Cirt (talk) 01:00, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RElements

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

In good faith - possible advertising or non notability? Chaosdruid (talk) 13:49, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: both advertising and non-notable. This is obvious soliciting of funds --- rElements have experienced an very high growth rate since its foundation. Google News Archive finds only one Experian report and a bunch of typos. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:18, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:18, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this company. Joe Chill (talk) 20:32, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: From the article "Rafael Gracioso Martins, a young entrepreneur who worked and developed Chemical Vapor Deposition chambers for producing advanced composites...", and the only contributing author is rgmcorp. Coincidence? I think not. Blatant self-promotion, in direct contravention of policy.

-- Cain Mosni (talk||contribs) 13:11, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The lack of independent sources is a strong indication of lack of notability. Edward321 (talk) 14:33, 26 June 2010 (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.

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. T. Canens (talk) 20:22, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User Workspace Management

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I feel this article must duplicate another, and possibly is just a definition for a category that's already on Wikipedia. In any case, there is no source here, and nothing worth expanding. I think the user created the page in good faith, but it seems this information is redundant redundant with other information on this encyclopedia. — Timneu22 · talk 13:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unreferenced, non-notable neologism per WP:NEO; evident WP:Conflict of interest by creator whose account bears the name of the product manager for a product using this neologism. Empty Buffer (talk) 13:56, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. User Workspace Management refers to the delivery of IT services to an end user that are relevant to or needed by that end user at a certain time, date, location and on a certain computing device. Examples of these IT services are software applications, printers, data, network shares or personal settings. Huh? - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:36, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:36, 22 June 2010 (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.

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. T. Canens (talk) 23:32, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Newgate Technology

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested PROD - Company fails WP:CORP no significant coverage - see here Codf1977 (talk) 12:16, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per lack of verifiable coverage to meet the criteria for WP:CORP. -- role^player 13:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A a developer of data collection software, yet another rather ordinary tech business with no claim to historical, technical, or cultural importance, using Wikipedia as a free ad host. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:12, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:12, 21 June 2010 (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.

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. T. Canens (talk) 00:05, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ARES Corporation

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not a notable consulting business. Contested proposed deletion. References provided are internal, based on press releases, profile pages, or simply quote business personnel as sources. Google News yields press releases and routine announcements. No indication that this business "has had any significant or demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education". Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:54, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.

Did you take time to even read the article? This is a very notable business that is having a significant impact on society, science, and economics. Please take time to read the article, building a plant that will produce 15 million gallons of biodiesel fuel is notable in itself. Bsanders246 (talk) 16:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The references in the article when I nominated were: a link to a company website, a dead link to a press release, another dead link to an online "community" site, a local story about their failure to build the biodiesel plant as planned, and four more links to the company website. What I found when I looked myself was not more promising. I don't think I miscategorized the sources given. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:33, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you have issues with the references, then you can address them through editing the page or proposing the edits on the discussion page. Issues with references does not mean the subject of the article is non-notable, that is causation. Instead of jumping to an AFD, recommending improvements to the page is preferable in accordance with WP policy. This is especially true when the article in question is 3.5 years old. Bsanders246 (talk) 16:38, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As Jimmy Wales put it, we "attempt to make some sort of judgment about the long term historical notability of something." The question is whether this consulting business with a few government contracts has any long term historical significance. I looked, and found nothing better than what was in the article, which does not appear to make this rise to that level. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:34, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: article needs to be improved but according to [1] it is notable. Dewritech (talk) 17:42, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The NASA reference barely tops three sentences. Not really coverage, the paragraph in question merely reiterates that the company exists, they're a small business contractor for the ISS and that NASA likes the work they're doing for them. 2 says you, says two 01:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not hard to do what your doing. You can find a small clause in WP:RS to discredit almost any link out there. This link may not have significant coverage, but others do. This reference, in conjunction with others, proves the company is notable. NASA is a very well-respected government entity and to be 1 out of 3 companies to receive an award from them causes ARES Corporation to stand out in their niche. The company is notable. Bsanders246 (talk) 01:58, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are standards of coverage that are supposed to be uniformly applied to all references. 2 says you, says two 02:24, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Company is not notable, and the original author is on an obvious campaign to promote the company and its products on Wikipedia. (All of these articles are under AfD discussions.) - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 03:56, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been around for 3 years. You need to work on assuming good faith. Bsanders246 (talk) 13:13, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Longevity of an article has absolutely, positively nothing to do with whether or not an article should be deleted. You have created or done major work on articles related to the company which are promotional in nature. Assuming good faith is one thing, but ignoring a pattern of action is quite another. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 01:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These articles being "promotional in nature" is your opinion. I mentioned that the article had been around for 3 years so that you would pick up on the fact that i'm not the original author of this page, which you still haven't figured out. "I worked on articles related to the company"... obviously. This is a result of me interpreting a WP Guideline the wrong way and branching out this companies products into seperate articles, instead of keeping it on the same article. "ignoring a pattern of action". I'm not asking you to ignore your insticts, but rather your inherent bias to that any attempt to work on an article must mean i'm associated with the company and must mean i'm trying to promote it. Which neither is true. See my previous response to your comment on the Avert Page, first attempt at a major re-write + WP's random article feature = This Bsanders246 (talk) 13:41, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, but you can understand when one person works on a series of article about a company and its products, there is often an attempt to promote that company in violation of WP guidelines. I've seen it too many times here. - Realkyhick (Talk to me)

I understand where your coming from. It probably wasn't the best idea to attempt my first re-write on a company. At least I learned a few things about notability/reliable sources and the deletion process. Bsanders246 (talk) 15:39, 23 June 2010 (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.

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 keep. no consensus for deleting - any merging can be discussed at the talk page JForget 14:42, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Placid Casual

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-Notable company, Fails WP:CORP, only claim to any form of notability is that of association. Codf1977 (talk) 08:35, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or Merge to Super Furry Animals. Surely option other than deletion can be considered?--Michig (talk) 10:21, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It can - and don't call me Shirly... The worst case option for this is to redirect to the bands' article, per point 4. Lugnuts (talk) 12:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"before nominating an article for deletion" - I like the sound of that.--Michig (talk) 14:00, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the label has put out albums by numerous bands, most of whom are notable. By the nominator's logic no record companies would have articles. Cavie78 (talk) 17:43, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Gongshow ^Talk 17:15, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. — Gongshow ^Talk 17:16, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge at the very least. The label has taken on notable bands, and WP:INHERITED is not really a valid counter-argument here. Being the record label and essentially the contracting agency behind a notable group of musicians is different than if this were an article about, say, one of the band member's sister. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 20:06, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Easily notable, was this nominated as a joke or something? Jeni ^(talk) 23:25, 20 June 2010 (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.

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 keep. Courcelles (talk) 00:16, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Purchase Records

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-Notable student record label. Unreferenced. Contested PROD. — Jeff G. ツ 15:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. Nominator appears not to have seen the article's talk page. --Michig (talk) 15:10, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: editors appear not to have found those sources in the preceding four and a half years. — Jeff G. ツ 18:53, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But those sources were found (easily), and identified on the article's talk page, well before you nominated it for deletion. I find it worrying that you appear neither to have searched for sources nor looked at the article's talk page before deciding that it should be deleted.--Michig (talk) 18:59, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If the label has earned 3 Grammy nominations, wouldn't that establish notability? The claim is made on the college website, but an outside source would be nice. JNW (talk) 15:16, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Michig. JNW (talk) 15:16, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per the references now found. Lugnuts (talk) 16:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Cavie78 (talk) 18:47, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Gongshow ^Talk 17:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. — Gongshow ^Talk 17:08, 20 June 2010 (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.

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 keep. no one in favor of deletion MINUS the nom JForget 14:46, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Johnson Records

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-Notable company, Fails WP:CORP. Codf1977 (talk) 09:22, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's a record label, and an important one from the 1980s. If it had been run as a 'company' it may not have gone out of business. Ron Johnson Records was one of the most significant (genuine) independent labels of the 1980s, contributing five tracks to the NME's era-defining C86 compilation, and releasing 34 records of which 12 were hits on the independent chart. Like most 1980s labels, the bulk of the coverage that exists is in print magazines such as NME, Melody Maker, etc., that are not available online. Label owner Dave Parsons was included in International Who's Who in Popular Music 2002 based on this label - the book lists Ron Johnson Records as winning the award for Independent Label of the Year in 1986. Google Books shows plenty of sources, most without preview available. The fansite linked in the article is by Rhodri Marsden - journalist for The Independent and keyboard player in Scritti Politti. The label's sound is still being identified as an influence today (see this). Deleting this would be really silly.--Michig (talk) 09:59, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Cavie78 (talk) 18:47, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Gongshow ^Talk 17:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. — Gongshow ^Talk 17:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Michig. Part of a series of bad faith nominations by this user. Jeni ^(talk) 10:59, 21 June 2010 (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.

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. Shimeru 07:20, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Xerafy

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability Schuhpuppe (talk) 22:15, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:34, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, weakly, per nomination. This business is a vendor of passive UHF EPC Radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags for mounting on metal assets... used to help locate and identify items for inventory management, scheduled maintenance, and quality control. Their chief claim to fame would be the claim that their RFID tags work on metals, because ordinarily radio waves and metals do not mix. This would be interesting, if it worked. But I find nothing that looks like an independent reliable source for this. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 20:44, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No coverage in reliable sources. Google news turns up this article but it's in Chinese so it's very difficult for me to determine if the article is a press release, and if the site itself might be considered a reliable source. -- Whpq (talk) 16:56, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That article looks like simple coverage of an appearance at a trade exhibition; but the Babelfish machine translation is enough to move me to interpretive dance. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 20:33, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do not delete -I've added additional references to support the article and valid sources verifying the claims. There are more press releases coming with customer applications. Kellystark (talk) 23:27, 24 June 2010 (UTC)KellyStark[reply]

Delete This will need coverage in third-party reliable sources to show notability. It doesn't have that yet. First Light (talk) 02:43, 26 June 2010 (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.

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. Courcelles (talk) 02:51, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ennstone Johnston

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable company. Single ref is a brief mention in by a newpaper columnist. Content is advertisement-like content from company website. Notable customers do not make a company notable. — ERcheck (talk) 20:38, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom — Rlevse • Talk • 21:38, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep... ... because Ennstone is a significant company in its business area but only keep if the article can be very substantially improved Andy F (talk) 07:05, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:24, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as per nom Codf1977 (talk) 20:51, 20 June 2010 (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.

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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:38, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deck Cheese

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-Notable company, Fails WP:CORP, only claim to any form of notability is that of association. Codf1977 (talk) 19:00, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non notable lable and promotional. --Wintonian (talk) 20:28, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:19, 19 June 2010 (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.

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 no consensus. One strong keep rationale + 3 "per nom" deletes = no consensus with leave to renominate in a few weeks to produce better discussion. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:07, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ISLA Bank

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability. No independent sources. Google searches find more results for a holiday cottage in Scotland. Restricting the search to the Philippines just shows directory listings and nothing to establish WP:notability noq (talk) 14:11, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete agree with nom. Holiday cottage in Scotland sounds interesting DRosin (talk) 15:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning to Keep - Although the evidence isn't quite so strong as I'd like. The notability criteria should be out of WP:COMPANY and not just the general vague notability preference here. A Google test may not necessarily be the best possible source of information in this case, and I'm unfortunately not familiar with sources in the Philippines to provide a more useful source of information to help out in this case. With the only current "source" of information being the official website, I find that to be dubious, but I'm quite certain that there are some additional sources of information for this institution that could be found to meet the raw sourcing requirements. The real hook, something that makes this more than just another bank, is something that would be useful for the article. In this sense, notability is the issue and if something more about the bank being "established from a rich Filipino heritage" could be defined or expanded... what heritage they are really talking about in the article could make this something useful. At the moment, it reads like an advertisement and not something encyclopedic. --Robert Horning (talk) 14:14, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Speedy deletion tag was removed first by the article's author, and then after it was restored, by an editor with no other edits. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:03, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - As per nom. Codf1977 (talk) 20:53, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 15:03, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs 05:13, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - as per nom. --OpenFuture (talk) 07:50, 4 July 2010 (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.

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. The reasons for deletions seem more policy-based than the reasons for retention here. –MuZemike 23:43, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GiftZip.com

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

seems to be a promotional article, unsure how it meets the criteria in WP:ORG or WP:WEB. Elevating for discussion. I am also nominating the following related pages because it is directly affiliated with the suject, as described in GiftZip.com:

Maashatra11 (talk) 17:16, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Since this is essentially SPAM, I wouldn't mind if it were done in a speedy-like fashion. JBsupreme (talk) ✄ ✄ ✄ 16:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see how this is "essentially SPAM". I am not a representative of this company and this article has been up for over a year. Additionally, no one seems to be offering constructive tips on how to improve it. Also, as I tried to illustrate in my last post, the website does not sell a product or service. I believe that if you referred to the articles referenced in said article, that you would be able to see the notability of this company in Michigan's wavering, fleeting economy. GiftZip.com is a house name in Michigan. GiftZip.com was just named one of 10 Hot Startups, along side Foursquare which seems to have easily kept its stop on Wikipedia, despite the fact Foursquare has not been along as long.

Malloryloren (talk) 17:09, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete - per WP:CORP - "attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation" is not sufficient, and no real coverage outside business magazines etc. Claritas § 18:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:36, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Entrepreneur has Google Page Rank of 7. It is not a limited interest or limited circulation publication, it receives nearly as much traffic as ABCnews + MSNBC's websites. 76.226.177.13 (talk) 18:58, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Both - as per nom and Claritas Codf1977 (talk) 09:54, 25 June 2010 (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.

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. -- Cirt (talk) 03:51, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Spade Kitty Records

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This minor record label has lots of what appear to be bluelinks, but turn out to point to unrelated articles, disambig pages or are just plain name-dropping. As far as I can tell, only two bands signed to this label have articles, and they are of questionable notability. In any case, WP:MUSIC is silent on labels, so this article should be deleted by the standards of WP:CORP. I would have just prod-tagged it, but want to make sure the community agrees. Speciate (talk) 01:45, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Non-notable company - fails WP:CORP and WP:GNG. Any claim to notability seems to be be one of inherited. Codf1977 (talk) 10:43, 19 June 2010 (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.

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. -- Cirt (talk) 03:56, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

InVNT

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable company - article written by member of staff from inVNT's PR Company. The author has provided a number of Sources backing up the claim of notability (see talk page) listed below :

"Dialing Up the Event Channel" - Not about inVNT - some mentions and quotes.
"inVNT's Event at its New Office" - Is about inVNT and the office warming party they hosted, and that they got a good deal on the rent - not sure that makes them notable.
"PSS World Medical - About PSS World Medical Forges -Not inVNT - they do get some mentions and quotes.
"Try a Twitter Q&A" - One mention - that inVNT know how to set up a computer.
"Society for Human Resource Management Signs Multi-Year Event Contract with inVNT" - Has the feel of a press release. (has "about XYZ Inc" section and contact details at the end)
"Optimism Blooms at Springtime Expo" - About the ASAE & The Center's Springtime Expo - some description of a presentation by inVNT staff, but it is no means the topic of the article.
"inVNT defies Economy to Post 250% Growth in 2009" - Has the feel of a press release. (has "about XYZ Inc" section and contact details at the end)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORP There is also a AfD on the founder Scott Cullather Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Cullather. Codf1977 (talk) 16:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I loathe companies who spam Wikipedia like this. JBsupreme (talk) ✄ ✄ ✄ 16:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete complete failure to assert any notability --Errant Tmorton166^(Talk) 16:55, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete A7&G11 per nom. —ΩpenTheWindows™ 17:48, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:GNG. WP:CORP, looks like vanispamcruftisement to me. Claritas § 17:55, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:CORP, no significant coverage online, half of a two-page WP:Walled garden of non-notability. Empty Buffer (talk) 21:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:27, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete per nom. Hash789 (talk) 16:23, 20 June 2010 (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.

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. -- Cirt (talk) 03:53, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vizelia

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested speedy deletion for an article on a software house, translated form the French wiki. While my French is limited, it seems that the actual references do not add up to meeting WP:CORP, so brought here for wider discussion. Tikiwont (talk) 15:15, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Nakon 15:16, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - there's some coverage in French - [2], entry in the European technology atlas - [3], but not really enough significant coverage to meet WP:CORP or WP:GNG. Claritas § 15:22, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, spam: leader in Building Information Modeling and Preventive maintenance... Oonh, it's a leader we are now, is it? And they made a strategic move! No showing of historical, technical, or cultural importance. - 15:40, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:40, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per everyone above. Etrigan (talk) 16:06, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per everybuddy. JBsupreme (talk) ✄ ✄ ✄ 16:29, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The tone of the article make it not encyclopedic. Pxtreme75 (talk) 07:25, 20 June 2010 (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.

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. -- Cirt (talk) 03:53, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BlockMaster

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is a paid-editing piece developed through a conflict of interest via this request on freelancer.com which reads "We need help copywriting a text about our company, BlockMaster, and our products for wikipedia. BlockMaster provides a solution for protecting portable data – a secure USB flash drive and a management console. We need someone who can understand high-tech descriptions and who is very familiar with how wikipedia works. Deadline Fri, June 18th."

Wikipedia is not a medium for companies to promote themselves. This also appears to have sparse notability, as most of the references are to press releases and I am unable to find significant discussion of this company in multiple reliable sources. This is nominated alongside another article created via this job, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SafeStick. Them From Space 15:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination, and probably salt just to be sure. The references provided are all to minor trade publications with small audiences and do not establish any historical, technical, or cultural significance. And if somebody got paid for this, it's safe to assume that's the best they could come up with. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Goes completely against Wikipedia policies as well as the spirit of it. Paying people to spam Wikipedia is just not on. Nuwewsco (talk) 20:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I still believe, that the company which product is claimed (by such a reliable source as eWeek magazine) to outperform its competitors (which have articles in Wikipedia) has both the right and the need to be presented here, no metter what the motivation of the main contributor is. User: pozytyv (talk) 17:16, 19 June 2010 (Kyiv time)
Delete per nom. Etrigan (talk) 13:16, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. (Although I would see nothing wrong with someone paying for non-spam articles following Wikipedia policy.) Tomas e (talk) 17:30, 20 June 2010 (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.

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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:40, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

3Sigma

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't find significant coverage for this company. Joe Chill (talk) 20:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:59, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I searched not only this company but it's parent company as well and I could not find any notable/reliable sources. Anything I could find on this company seems to be advertisement. The author points to an advertisement video and the company's own website as reliable sources. The poor sourcing aside, I can't see anything notable or unique about this company that would warrent an article either to suggest there could be a source out there. I agree with nom, fails WP:CORP.--v/r - T P 00:26, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Limited search results for 3Sigma, and appears, at least, 3 different companies are using the same name. As mentioned above, results read like advertisements, and not all results are for this specific company. Fails WP:GNG and/or WP:CORP. Akerans (talk) 14:21, 24 June 2010 (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.

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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:40, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Culbann C.P.C

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't find significant coverage for this organization. Joe Chill (talk) 18:47, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on last AfD: Hosting a notable event does not show automatic notability per WP:N. In Schmidt's searches, I didn't see any significant coverage. Joe Chill (talk) 18:52, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Northern Ireland-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:44, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:44, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:44, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Notability has not been established since last AfD. The one source reads like an advertisement, which does not establish notability. And, assuming the 2011 event will be any different is WP:CRYSTAL. Also, I could not find any additional coverage. Fails WP:GNG and/or WP:ORG Akerans (talk) 15:19, 24 June 2010 (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.

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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:39, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Housing Investment Company

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Claims notability no sources to back up and appears to be a ocnflict of interest or self promotion article. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 06:12, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - It is verifiably one of the largest construction companies in Iran (as here), but I'm not immediately able to find English language sources giving it significant coverage. However, per WP:BIAS, foreign language sources can be presumed to exist and per WP:N and WP:BEFORE no deletion should occur until a serious attempt has been made to find such sources. - DustFormsWords (talk) 07:20, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

your google search doesn't show third party coverage in reliable sources. LibStar (talk) 07:24, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it most certainly doesn't, nor was I suggesting it does. I was suggesting it points to links verifying the claim that the company exists, and is of a certain size. One such link is here. Another is here. Given that information, as above, it's reasonable to assume that foreign language sources originating from Iran exist (government tender documents, if nothing else) and that therefore no deletion should take place until serious attempts to locate them have been made. - DustFormsWords (talk) 07:33, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless reliable sources are found in Persian, I have to say delete. I don't think simply being the largest construction company equates to automatic notability. does the largest construction company in each country get an automatic article? LibStar (talk) 07:24, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It does actually. However I was having problems finding sources for the Persian side. Likely this is because Ican't speak persian but I think we have a obligation to remove anything we can't prove conclusively. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 07:25, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

agree, that's why I say delete in the absence of sources. LibStar (talk) 07:28, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can conclusively prove the existence of the company and its rough size from the sources above, so verifiability isn't an issue. The issue is notability, which is a separate and higher standard. The onus of verifiability is on the person adding content; the onus of notability per WP:BEFORE is on the person seeking its deletion. To argue deletion you are obliged to have made good faith searches for likely sources of significant coverage, and come up empty. Per WP:BIAS and WP:N that includes presumed foreign language sources. - DustFormsWords (talk) 07:33, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess my comment while implicit wasn't explicit enough. I couldn't find reference before I nominated it. I looked. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 07:36, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you searched Persian language news archives, through, presumably, some kind of Persian-oriented search engine? - DustFormsWords (talk) 07:38, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I note also that the article is actively under construction and is not obviously vandalism; the AfD may be premature and there may be merit in allowing the creator to continue developing the article before making a final judgement. - DustFormsWords (talk) 07:38, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even possibly the bigger issue is a SPA Promotion account. H.I. Co.= Housing Investment Company Hell In A Bucket (talk) 07:39, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, it's almost certainly an conflict of interest account, and it should be closely watched. And the article will probably need to be tidied when they're done, if it survives deletion. But conflict of interest is not, in and of itself, a reason to delete. - DustFormsWords (talk) 07:41, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, however it does add a mitigating factor when I consider it. I understand this isn't the case for everyone. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 07:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:17, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:18, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shimeru 20:59, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the AfD tag has been missing from the article for five days [4]. I restored it. There are a few reliable sources available in Persian [5] (Google News does not cover Iran I believe, but there are some newspapers among the regular Google Hits). But in its present state this article has absolutely nothing worth keeping ... if we had an article on Bank Maskan (aka Housing Bank, which is one of the major banks of Iran and the parent company of HIC) I'd rather just propose redirecting it there. At the moment I am working on saving another article from AfD, but let me see if I can find the time to start such an article. cab (talk) 05:48, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Metropolitan90, then redirect to Bank Maskan (which I just started). cab (talk) 06:12, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as copyright violation of various pages on the company's web site; see [6], [7], and [8], for example. This company may be notable enough for a Wikipedia article, but copying the company's web site is not the way to go about writing such an article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:50, 25 June 2010 (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.

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 redirect to Michael Corrente. Redirecting as an editorial decision, consider this a no consensus close with leave to speedy renominate. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:13, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Verdi Corrente Productions

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article has existed a few weeks now, with multiple problems. Summarize: reads link an advertisement, no notability, nothing links here, no reliable sources, and author has edited only this page and Inkubus, which leads me to believe this is a single-purpose account. No non-trivial third-party coverage. — Timneu22 · talk 18:40, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently working on enhancing the page's objectivity as well as providing links and references for the company. It seems that it is a professional production outfit. I agree the page needs work.User:HarvardGenius

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:48, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:48, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge any verifiable information to Michael Corrente. All I can find are press releases and passing mention. This company has not yet released a film. -- Whpq (talk) 17:09, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 22 June 2010 (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.

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 keep. T. Canens (talk) 01:17, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stan James

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Consensus at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 June 8 was to list at AfD for potential notability issues. This is a procedural, neutral nomination. Regards, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 17:06, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:56, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. This is one of the UK's best-known bookmakers, as a cursory glance at the Google News search linked above will confirm. I'm flabbergasted that we didn't have an article on such a notable subject until a couple of weeks ago, and disappointed, but not surprised (but disappointed that I am not surprised), that the kneejerk reaction to the creation of this article was to nominate it for speedy deletion. Phil Bridger (talk) 23:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as above. The article needs expanding and tidying up, but Stan James is a major company that has been sponsoring world championships such as this for years and has much coverage. Nuttah (talk) 17:09, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It is difficult to get at the coverage due to their sponsorship of high profile events clogging up the results. However, they are a well known company in the UK. If you dig deeper in the gnews results, you get stuff like this, which is decent coverage. Quantpole (talk) 15:58, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, article does not state notability.--Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 04:55, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only the nom is a 'neutral' procedural nomination which logically entails that your 'per-nom' vote become a neutral vote. You may want to read the discussion before placing your vote. A brief look at the above tools shows that the topic is clearly notable. Christopher Connor (talk) 05:23, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have now expanded the article. Christopher Connor (talk) 06:18, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Having said at DRV (without being able to see the article) that the speedy deletion should be overturned, I was sadly disappointed by the article when it was revealed. It scarcely made any attempt at claiming notability. It has now been considerably improved and makes credible notability claims, backed with references. Thincat (talk) 12:28, 28 June 2010 (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.

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 no consensus. WP:NPASR T. Canens (talk) 01:19, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bop Cassettes

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Record label, who may have had some notable clients, is not it's self notable. (see WP:Inherited) - Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG as it has not had significant coverage of it's own. Un ref'ed for over 5 years. Codf1977 (talk) 10:33, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I remember reading about Bop in music mags back in the late 80s. This coverage exists, it just needs someone to dig it out of the archives. The label had several releases in the upper reaches of the UK Independent Chart. The label was discussed in Derek Wynne's book The Culture industry: the arts in urban regeneration and also in Steve Redhead's The end of the century party: youth and pop towards 2000. Releases also included the (fairly classic) Manchester North of England compilation. I believe the Scam label was also a subsidiary of Bop - releases included Dub Sex, Social Kaos. An important label from a key era in the Manchester music scene.--Michig (talk) 15:13, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:37, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:37, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Michig. Bearian (talk) 23:22, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox (talk) 00:26, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I added one source.--Pink Bull 02:25, 22 June 2010 (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.

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 no consensus. –MuZemike 01:18, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Survivor Records

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Record label, who may have some notable clients, is not it's self notable. (see WP:Inherited) - Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG as it has not had significant coverage of it's own. Codf1977 (talk) 20:07, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep significance is not a question. Wandering Courier (talk) 21:27, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The artists are notable, but the record label isn't. Joe Chill (talk) 22:29, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, until notability is established using multiple 3rd party sources. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 00:11, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Lengthy and significant roster of artists; important in its genre as such. Meets WP:MUSIC's definition of "one of the more important indie labels". Chubbles (talk) 07:14, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:17, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Keep - as per above. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 03:23, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, after looking at another separate AfD that I was commenting in, I am changing to keep. Now that I look closer, I see that the label does in fact have notable artists associated with it. And I do not believe WP:INHERITED is even remotely appropriate here, because, as I said in the other AfD, being signed on a record label is much different than the type of "association" that is mentioned in WP:INHERITED. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 23:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think WP:INHERITED is exactly right here - I am not saying that having notable artists associated with it does not bring the company notability, it might, but that has to be demonstrated by significant coverage of it's own just having notable artists associated and saying that it is notable as a result is a case of WP:INHERITED. With out the significant coverage of it's own this company fails WP:CORP.Codf1977 (talk) 06:55, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some above argued against deletion... Chubbles (talk) 22:22, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Notable company - Seems to be part of a mass nomination of record labels which the nominator seems to have something against.

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.

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. Input since relist has only been in favor of deletion; article has shown no improvement since nomination. — Scientizzle 19:19, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TechExcel Inc.

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Gnews search returns only three hits which mention the company; one is a press release, another appears to be a generic link to one of their whitepapers, and the last only mentions them in passing. This would not seem to meet WP:CORP. In addition, the person creating this page added it because they "resell their products", so there is some COI here. Mr. Vernon (talk) 14:24, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm must say I am surprised, TechExcel is a leader in ALM and has been 2 years running on the SD Times 100 list, as per here: http://www.sdtimes.com/link/34383 please let me know what else I need to provide? MaryMallone (talk) 22:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no significant coverage in reliable sources. Lots of press releases, tho. --Nuujinn (talk) 21:36, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Note that ALM, ITSM and CRM are "application lifecycle management", "IT service management", and "customer relationship management", yet another bit player in a crowded field. Fits the profile of a Wikipedia spammer. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 20:49, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, how do you define "another bit player"? If you look in trade press for example in the ALM area then you will see that TechExcel is a leader in the area. MaryMallone (talk) 22:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MaryMallone, you may want to review notability requirements, and policies regarding conflict of interest. I see that you are new here, and I'm sure you have the best of intentions--it is very difficult to write an article and get it accepted if you're not familiar with policy. If the article is deleted, by all means feel free to request that it be put into your userspace for additional work or time required to get the article in good shape. Please feel free to post any questions on my talk page. --Nuujinn (talk) 22:45, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Nuujinn, I did look at both the Notability and Conflict of interest articles, and on the notability I most of the 3rd party sources on TechExcel is relating to specific products so I opted not to use them as that would be in my mind very commercial and on the conflict of interest then I deliberatly kept the text on both the company and products simple and generic to make sure it would be objective. MaryMallone (talk) 10:06, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, well you see, what you need is to find some references such as reviews that cover the company in some depth, or references that show the company has won a significant award. Absent significant coverage in reliable sources, notability is not established. --Nuujinn (talk) 23:54, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 22:33, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is no assertion of notability. This reads as nothing more than a directory entry. —gorgan_almighty (talk) 14:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are enough substance and webpages about the company, I have used the software in several previous companies. Some links:

http://www.issue-tracking-software.de/

http://codicesoftware.blogspot.com/2008/05/how-to-use-plastic-scm-and-bugzilla-ii.html

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2010/06/prweb4083084.htm

http://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/192204989;jsessionid=XKN1TNM0G3HWJQE1GHPSKH4ATMY32JVN

RJsweden (talk) 14:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC) — RJsweden (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Comment This is the user's only contribution to Wikipedia. Also, of those references: the first is a list of software in this space, the second is a blog entry on using the software, the third is a press release. The last is more of a product review than anything else. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 15:34, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The quality of this article put it on the early stub category. However, I have checked google, gnews, gbooks, gblogs and I could find numerous references for this company. As a personal note I have also checked their web-site and they have an ~~impressive~~ lengthy list of awards throughout the years (awards can be a little deceptive but it is an indication nevertheless...) http://www.techexcel.com/news/awards .Perhaps our inclination to deletionism and the fact that MaryMallone indeed has a COI with the company make us avoid to see the obvious - that this company is indeed notable. I would suggest to give the author the opportunity to improve the article. Pxtreme75 (talk) 19:41, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment By all means, have a go at improving the article. I'm not finding the awards all that impressive: one of one hundred companies or projects that have influence, one of 5000 fastest growing companies, one of 500 largest companies by revenue, and this list. --Nuujinn (talk) 20:22, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles (talk) 06:22, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting Note: Normally, this would be closed as delete with this discussion, but the recent comments merit a little more discussion in my mind, hence the relist. Courcelles (talk) 06:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, insufficient notability, also considering what has been put forward by the SPAs of this AfD. Haakon (talk) 10:35, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as per nom and Haakon. Codf1977 (talk) 21:00, 20 June 2010 (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.

Business Proposed deletions

Please hide this entire section when empty

Fringe economics

Businesspeople

Simon Sunatori

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTPROMO Promotional content, contains "puffery" and promotes Magnescribe pen. Wikipedia:Autobiography written like a CV, describing the subjects work history and achievements. Wikipedia:Notability MagneScribe invention and various other products not notable, only article found online was https://www.cracked.com/article_15768_as-seen-tv-10-most-laughably-misleading-ads.html. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nbbv (talk • contribs) 17:52, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 18:19, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Engineering. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:28, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I declined the G11 CSD tag on this article primarily because it has existed since 2007 (it was recreated 2 months after the first 2007 AFD and declined for G4 speedy back then) and suggested the AFD route. It is a BLP which lists only primary self-published citations. My online search found no independent Reliable Sources with any significant coverage of this person. It fails the WP:GNG guideline for WP:SIGCOV. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 20:22, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rituraj Kishore Sinha

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page is not about an elected candidate at either the national or state level, so it fails to follow the WP:NPOL guidelines. Also, he fails to qualify for a page according to WP:NBIO, or WP:ANYBIO. Charlie (talk) 17:12, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. Charlie (talk) 17:12, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, and Jharkhand. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:57, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NPOL. I cannot find subject's work as entrepreneur and politician that has made any significant impact and achievement, to be worthy of notice and noteworthy. RangersRus (talk) 14:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Priti Adani

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable individual. Sources are merely about the statements she has made which are sourced to WP:NEWSORGINDIA, and she is only known for being the wife of Gautam Adani. See WP:INHERITED. Ratnahastin (talk) 09:49, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:10, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Medicine, Gujarat, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:22, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pranav Adani

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable individual. Sources are promotional and cited to WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Only known for being a relative of Gautam Adani. See WP:INHERITED. Ratnahastin (talk) 09:54, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:10, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Gujarat and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:21, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isaac Mass

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This individual fails WP:ANYBIO and has done so since perhaps 2010. No apparent (nor significant) coverage by any unrelated party. JFHJr (㊟) 00:00, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Politicians, Law, and United States of America. JFHJr (㊟) 00:00, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nom. Maybe the thinnest BLP I've ever seen here! Andy Dingley (talk) 00:10, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:44, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Could not find anything that tells me this attorney is still active. This attorney has a very lengthy 2011 internet page about himself - personal background listings that have not much to do with being an attorney. The kind of person a town would be proud to have. But his legal "Experience" section is very scant and doesn't tell us much except others he previously worked for or with. An internet search doesn't bring up anything more recent. — Maile (talk) 01:27, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom UzbukUdash (talk) 05:06, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Mass is still active (the fellow's not yet fifty), and is a political figure in the rural county in which I lived for several years. Further, the article used to be a lot more extensive before rampant page blanking by anon IPs. With that, I doubt many people beyond the city limits of Greenfield, Massachusetts have heard of him, nor that he could meet the GNG. Ravenswing 13:05, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. People in politics aren't "inherently" notable just for existing, so the article's current form is obviously deeply inadequate if it just says that he exists and fails to even specify what political position he ever actually held in the first place — Ravenswing is correct that it's been longer in the past, but that history has him serving only at the municipal and county levels, which is not a free notability pass in the absence of much, much more reliable source coverage about the impact of that work than the article has ever shown. So there's no prior version of this that could be reverted to as a solution, because nothing that was ever in the article before satisfies the requirements of WP:NPOL either. Bearcat (talk) 14:37, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Correct. I did check old versions WP:BEFORE nominating, as this is obviously a gutted article. I also concluded there was no value in restoring any older versions, and the gutted version actualy portrays the subject in his most favorable light. JFHJr (㊟) 23:44, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, agreed: Mass' most prominent role as an elected official was as a city councilor in Greenfield, which is well under NPOL's requirements. Ravenswing 04:19, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Cyberpower7 (talk) 19:55, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Bearcat and Ravenswing. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:57, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable local lawyer, I don't see any sources for this person. The pages histories have been deleted and re-created so many times, I gave up trying to figure out what a longer version of this article showed... Oaktree b (talk) 21:26, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Nominator) WP:SNOW this process please, any available admin. Let's not waste anyone else's time on this over 6 more days. JFHJr (㊟) 23:57, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If one actually types words into Google, one finds that Mass and his wife are now the owners of the historic Greenfield Garden Cinemas,^[1]^[2] a plausible redirect target per WP:ATD-R. He received a "40 under 40" recognition from a regional business magazine^[3] and his various civic appointments have received local coverage,^[4] although unfortunately it appears that link rot or paywalls have obfuscated many other news articles from over 10 years ago (essentially a new dark age). --Animalparty! (talk) 04:25, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd think it a pretty implausible redirect, actually. The page has minuscule views over its entire history, the Garden Cinema page doesn't even namedrop Mass, and local namedrops ≠ "significant coverage." Ravenswing 16:24, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand and relate to the "dark age" part of @Animalparty!'s comment. There's a tendency for previously free articles to become dead or paywalled over time, or available only by subscription to proprietary archives, e.g. Proquest. I used to get very frustrated about this re WaPo, but now it's all subscriptionwalled. I've begun manually free-archiving new material in my creations for this reason. If you're here long enough, you see sources vanish. For situations other than this AfD, I try to archive decent sources in prior versions, which are sometimes removed just for being dead. I just didn't see any of that for this subject. YMMV. Cheers. JFHJr (㊟) 18:45, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Farragher, Thomas (November 14, 2019). "Saving the Garden movie house in Greenfield". Boston Globe.
^ Olson, Kris (15 April 2021). "Lawyer, wife reopen theater complex bought just before pandemic hit". Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly.
^ "Isaac Mass". BusinessWest. April 23, 2013. ISSN 1049-9822.
^ "Greenfield lawyer Isaac Mass appointed to Massachusetts State Ballot Law Commission". masslive.com. 15 March 2012.

Bruno Bertez

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Refunded after soft deletion, but the subject still fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO due to insufficient WP:SIGCOV. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:59, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and France. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:59, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No attempt seems to be made since the REFUND to update the article and large section are still unsourced. What sources are there are made up of routine annoucements and a small history of he paper which is a passing mention. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. No secondary sources on a WP:BLP that need high quality soures that are not there. scope_creep^Talk 05:17, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aloysius Chidozie Ogbonna

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is, as a matter of fact, no source to establish claims of significance or notability for the subject of this article. Sources are either primary, are closely related to the subject or are the subject's own opinion. From cursory search, nothing especially different and useful was found. Here lies my concern of critical undisclose paid editing from the author of this article or a close relation at best. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:58, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:58, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing the article. I understand your concerns regarding notability and potential conflict of interest. I'll provide additional, independent sources to establish the subject's significance. I declare no conflict of interest or paid editing affiliation with the subject. I'll revise the article to enhance quality and neutrality. Please offer guidance on improving the article.

Thank you very much for the review. Danielehisaiguokhian (talk) 15:28, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kirk Shaw

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable individual. Article is sourced pretty much entirely to press releases or companies associated with the individual. Also contains an unsourced list of non notable minor festival award. Spanneraol (talk) 00:37, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, Journalism, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. None of the sources indicate any sort of notabiliy. --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 18:20, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chibuike Emmanuel Onyekachi

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NBIO. Non-notable award. I don't believe the press pieces are independent of the subject. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 17:00, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 17:00, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article meets the necessary guidelines. Notable publications covered the subject extensively. Reviewing the links will confirm the credibility of these sources, they are from reputable publishers. Josvicsmide(2000) (talk) 09:18, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The press pieces are independent of the subject and they can be verified too. If you feel or think they're not, I think there should be more research on the sources. Danielehisaiguokhian (talk) 17:22, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:20, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article should be allowed. I have seen notable publications made about him. By going through the links, you will see they are verified. I also checked with real estate practitioners and confirmed that all information provided is accurate. Sebastine Chukwuebuka Okafor (talk) 19:36, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you share some of these publications you've seen? That's what we're looking for. Oaktree b (talk) 20:35, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/08/experts-calls-for-crackdown-on-quacks-in-real-estate-sector/

2)

https://dailypost.ng/2024/09/06/powell-homes-md-architect-onyekachi-earns-global-recognition-for-ethical-leadership-in-real-estate-development/

3)

https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/09/onyekachi-wins-client-centered-approach-and-sustainable-housing-solutions-award/

4)

https://journalist101.com/2024/09/09/powell-homes-and-shelters-md-wins-award-for-client-centered-approach-sustainable-housing-solutions/

5>)

https://dailypost.ng/2024/09/14/we-are-focused-on-providing-affordable-housing-to-nigerians-arc-chibuikem-powell-homes-md/

6)

https://independent.ng/we-are-focused-on-providing-affordable-housing-to-nigerians-arc-chibuikem/

7)

https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/10/economic-hardship-youths-urged-to-embrace-sustainable-skills/

8)

https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/10/meet-architect-chibuikem-onyekachi/

9)

https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/10/why-you-need-to-invest-in-nazareth-city-layout-neke-ulo-enugu-mama-g/

10)

https://independent.ng/powell-boss-calls-for-uniform-ogbanecheagu-levies-to-curb-extortion-in-seast-real-estate/

11)

https://journalist101.com/2024/09/26/powell-md-calls-for-uniform-youth-levy-to-curb-extortion-in-southeast-real-estate/

12)

https://thesun.ng/mbahs-anti-land-grabbing-law-a-masterstroke-real-estate-developer/

13)https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/09/arch-onyekachi-receives-ethical-leadership-award/

14)

https://corenews.com.ng/2024/09/08/powell-homes-and-shelters-md-wins-award-for-client-centered-approach-and-sustainable-housing-solutions/technology/

14)

https://newsflash.ng/powell-homes-md-architect-onyekachi-earns-global-recognition-for-ethical-leadership-in-real-estate-development/

An so on.

I took out time to search for his name. All these are notable sites. Sebastine Chukwuebuka Okafor (talk) 12:02, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: There is literally no source to establish notability for this subject, not the ones presented on this discussion, not from the article, and not from my BEFORE. In fact, subject fails WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Sources found are either closely related to the subject editorially or otherwise, or they are not reliable pieces. I have great concern for critical undisclosed paid editing and worst of all conflict of interest going on here with the subject and creator of this article. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:47, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I didn’t find anything other than what Sebastian has presented here. The coverages are mainly unreliable and others are puff pieces and so, subject does not the general notability critera. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 11:20, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The sources cannot justify the subject's notability. All the awards mentioned are run of the mills too. Ibjaja055 (talk) 15:10, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul D. Pantera

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Failed WP:BEFORE search. So unsourced that I missed the one source that was there and accidentally BLPROD'd initially (it was rightfully reverted by GB fan). Unfortunately, I find that non-BLP PRODs get reverted by article creators pretty quickly. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Businesspeople, Military, and Maryland. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nomination, fails WP:GNG and lacks adequate WP:RS citations. Go4thProsper (talk) 15:21, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gunnar Norberg

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Yet another hyperlocal politician in the walled garden created to boost Carmel-by-theSea who fails WP:NPOLITICIAN as mayor of a tiny town, fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. The article is filled with fluff and neither demonstrates nor verifies notability. Even the NYT reference is a passing mention. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and California. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I'm not seeing notability, this is more of a play-by-play of the person's life, career and death. Sources are pretty much is discussed in the nomination. I don't find anything esle. Oaktree b (talk) 18:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This is another article on a non-notable mayor of Carmel-by-the-Sea, a town of about 3,000 people. The sourcing is hyper-local or sourced to their own autobiography. The article is part of what some editors have called a "walled garden", the purpose of which was boosterism and WP:PROMO. Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN, WP:GNG and WP:NBUSINESSPERSON. Netherzone (talk) 19:09, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Oaktree b, I don't know if you saw that someone removed a lot of the content and sources before the article was nominated for AfD. I don't know if they were right or wrong to do so, but it is impossible to evaluate the article without this material, and so I think it should be kept in until someone explains why they though the deleted sources were not acceptable even for non-controversial material. I have restored some of it pending the result of this AfD. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's quite a bit more in the article now, but I'm not sure if it makes this person notable. Being in the War, acting, politician. Seems like an interesting life, but this still feels like an extended CV, nothing really for a wiki article. Oaktree b (talk) 23:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ssilvers, this is part of a "walled garden" of Carmel promo, this ANI will provide more context:[9] (final ANI discussion), which led to the creator's site ban.The editor had a long history of COI and undisclosed paid-editing, poor sourcing, self-published sources, COI sources, and deliberately misrepresenting sources to make subjects appear notable. Additionally, there was LOUTsocking. The editor who deleted some of the material, u|Left guide|Left guide, was working on clean up efforts removing hyperlocal sourcing, paid-COI sourcing, self-published sources, and questionable sources. These were not some random drive-by deletions. The problems went on for many years before the editor was community blocked/banned. Netherzone (talk) 00:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I just read the thread over at ANI, what a situation that was. Oaktree b (talk) 02:49, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The deletions made to the article left it ungrammatical and were done very poorly, leaving a highly misleading picture of the article for reviewers at AfD. Let people review the article with the sources, and we'll see what the result of the AfD really is. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:23, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Outlands_in_the_Eighty_Acres#History: mentioned there; merge necessary content if possible. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Re dir can always be created later, but deleting it first gives a level of protection against surreptitious resurrection by COI editors, a real concern with articles around Carmel-by-the-Sea topic demonstrated by multiple block evasion attempts by a certain editor. Graywalls (talk) 06:59, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets GNG, which is all that counts here, not the state of the article as it currently stands, nor how it got here. - SchroCat (talk) 08:29, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Agree with immediately preceding comment. Tim riley talk 09:10, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UTC)

Keep - a perfectly notable subject Jack1956 (talk) 21:36, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David Guillod

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined four times in AfC, and after the fourth decline the draft creator moved it to mainspace. I've removed a BLP violating section with various very poor sources including Google Docs pages(!).

There is no actual claim to notability. The only independent, secondary source that provides more than extremely minimal coverage is the NYT article which is not enough. WP:BLP1E also applies to that source. bonadea contributions talk 18:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. bonadea contributions talk 18:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Television, Management, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:43, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:COAT. This is a stub about accusations of sexual assault masquerading as an article about a run of the mill producer. I’m against userfying this because it’s been moved to main space without vetting. If we’re going to have an article about the accusations, then it needs to be written from scratch. Bearian (talk) 00:21, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perry Newberry

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Yet another hyperlocal politician in the walled garden created to boost Carmel-by-theSea who fails WP:NPOLITICIAN as mayor of a tiny town, fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. The article is filled with fluff and neither demonstrates nor verifies notability. Even the NYT reference is a passing mention. As for the play, 1,000 theatregoers is woefully small. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Businesspeople, Politicians, Theatre, and California. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It is an interesting entry about a small-town Mayor and newspaper publisher, but it is horribly written. Someone had removed a lot of the content before the article was nominated for AfD. I don't know if they were right or wrong to do so, but it is impossible to evaluate the article without this material, and so clearly it should be kept unless someone explains why they though the deleted sources were not acceptable even for non-controversial material. I have restored some of it pending the result of this AfD. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:28, 29 October 2024 (UTC) -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This article is another entry in ~~the "Carmelopedia"~~ what some editors have called a "walled garden", the purpose of which was boosterism and WP:PROMO effort to promote all things Carmel-by-the-Sea. This mayor, whose term ran for two years, of a town of less than 700 people during his term, does not meet notability criteria for an encyclopedia article. According to the article, he is "best known" for his efforts to keep Carmel free from tourists; this does not confer inherent notability. Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN. He was also a non-notable writer (fails WP:NAUTHOR) and he acted in a play at a local theater in Carmel (fails WP:NACTOR). (The Forest Theater section is because he acted in a play there - this is typical bloat/puffery from the editor who is now blocked for COI/UPE and poor sourcing.) The sources are all local or hyper-local, or sourced to the Carmel Residents Association (COI), or the questionable "Arcadia Publisher" Images of America series of books for the tourist trade. The New York Times citation does not mention him at all. Netherzone (talk) 18:59, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious: How do you know that he only served as mayor for 2 years? The article says that the was elected for a 2nd term as mayor. Most mayors serve for 4 years, so that would indicate that he was mayor for 8 years. If that is not true, you should add refs to the article to make that clear for reviewers. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox states that he was In office 1922–1924. I have no idea why his term was so short. Netherzone (talk) 21:18, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes are notoriously full of errors. It is far more likely that the infobox is simply wrong. Definitely never rely on uncited infobox assertions. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:57, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I could not verify the claim in the two citations in the article regarding two mayoral terms either. Netherzone (talk) 04:13, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This source says he was mayor from 1923-24.[10] It's from the Carmel Residents Association, so it's a connected source - doesn't contribute to notability and probably should not be used in the encyclopedia, esp. since the dates don't match up with the above. However, it also does not mention anything about a second term. The article creator had a habit of sometimes misrepresenting sources which was one of the reasons for his block, so the two term claim should probably be taken with a grain of salt unless it can be verified to an independent reliable source. Netherzone (talk) 04:31, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found a NYT article that is helpful. I think the 2nd term as mayor is dubious and have deleted that, because if it were true, the NYT article would likely have said so. I also saw a listing of all the mayors of Carmel in a non-RS, but it listed someone else from 1928 to 1930. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:33, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There's extensive coverage of him in California papers, see San Francisco Call and Post, Fresno Morning Republican, San Francisco Chronicle (2), Oakland Tribune (2). Easily passes GNG. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:42, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: sources presented attest of his notability; a redirect and merge should have been considered anyway. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sources listed above seem to be enough for GNG. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 02:02, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources or redirect top List of mayors of Carmel-by-the-Sea, California. The so-called derogatory Carmelopedia rationale is NOT a valid one for nomination for AFD. Djflem (talk) 16:17, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sources provided by BeanieFan11 are sufficient to pass WP:GNG. Sal2100 (talk) 17:41, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets GNG criterion and should be kept. Go4thProsper (talk) 15:19, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John C. Catlin

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:ROTM lawyer, and no-one knows what a "Blacksmith Mayor" is. This seems to be a soubriquet bestowed upon him by the creating editor, who created one or more walled gardens in and around Carmel-by-the-Sea, with distinctly useless hyperlocal referencing. WP:NOTINHERITED applies - look at the list of people he knew! Fails WP:V, fails WP:BIO, fails WP:NPOLITICIAN, fails WP:GNG. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, and California. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this article on this former mayor and lawyer that is one of a series of articles written with a promotional tone of boosterism. The boosterism resulted in what some have called a "walled garden" surrounding the town and its inhabitants that connect the editor's articles with one another, usually through a hub like Timeline of Carmel-by-the-Sea, California, or Timeline of Carmel-by-the-Sea, California, or the The Carmel Pine Cone. Carmel had a population of around 2,000 when he was in office for two years. He was a run-of-the-mill politician who does not meet WP notability criteria for politicians. As to his title, "Blacksmith Mayor", it's a mystery as mentioned in the nom, and may be a neologism fabricated by the creator. Hyper-local sourcing. Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN, WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Editor Bearian has developed useful standards (not guideline or policy) for determining of attorneys HERE and mayors for HERE. (No ping because I do not want this to be perceived as canvassing.) Netherzone (talk) 14:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 14:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's a case to be made for GNG, with a three-column feature in the Sacramento Bee and a full-column long story in the Oakland Tribune. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Someone removed a lot of the content and sources before the article was nominated for AfD. I don't know if they were right or wrong to do so, but it is impossible to evaluate the article without this material, and so I think it should be kept in until someone explains why they though the deleted sources were not acceptable even for non-controversial material. I have restored some of it pending the result of this AfD. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Carmel-by-the-Sea,_California: especially the part about the Forge (limit merge to a reasonable amount of content) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC) I cannot access the new sources but I am sure they are good and therefore remove my !vote. For the sake of transparency, note that I’received a message inviting me to evaluate the new sources.Mushy Yank (talk) 19:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The sources listed above in addition to this, this and this appear to be enough for GNG. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 16:04, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sopon Pornchokchai

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO. 2 of the 3 sources provided are primary. Created by a single purpose editor so possible promotion. LibStar (talk) 03:43, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Thailand. LibStar (talk) 03:43, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Doesn't meet the people notability guidelines as mentioned by LibStar. I did a few Google searches, and the results were minimal to say the least. Nothing that indicates significance or notability as a person. Sirocco745 (talk) 04:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There was considerable press spotlight on him in 2013 when he ran for Bangkok governor. It's mostly reporting of his campaigning stunts (Thairath, Sanook, Prachatai), interviews focusing on his policies (MCOT FM 96.5, Voice TV), and profiles and campaign updates based on PR material (Isranews, Krungthep Turakij, Post Today, Sanook, Sanook, Sanook). Apart from that campaign, he's quite regarded as an expert in his field, and is quoted a lot in the press,[11][12][13][14][15][16] which should push his notability beyond that coming from the single event. That said, there doesn't seem to be much third-party coverage that looks at the subject's biography in depth. There's this Sanook article, though it's based on information in the Thai Wikipedia. And there's a recent interview on MCOT FM 100.5, but the info mainly comes from him talking about himself. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. His Thai name "โสภณ พรโชคชัย" should be used for searching. There are plenty of references, such as those provided by Paul_012 above. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 03:58, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per sources given by Paul_012 above—that's enough for him to pass WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. ManoiCMU (talk) 15:38, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jhonson Napoleon

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

BLP of a businessman lacking any clear claim of notability and apparently not a GNG pass. Mccapra (talk) 23:43, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Education, and Haiti. Mccapra (talk) 23:43, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails GNG, wasn't able to find any reliable-source-looking-things that covered the subject of the article that were not thinly veiled press releases Noah ^💬 00:13, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The dozen or so lines of text read like a brief resume rather than showing anything notable. There is limited coverage of this name, mostly name drops in articles about other things to be found online. I don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:02, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per Mccapra -- Robertjamal12 ~🔔 20:32, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - a run of the mill business person without significant coverage. Bearian (talk) 04:42, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ersel Göral

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

BLP of a successful businessman who has had a career in airport management. Nothing here indicates notability. A draft also exists. Mccapra (talk) 22:00, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey. Mccapra (talk) 22:00, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: There seems to be some coverage in the Turkish media, sufficiently spread out in time, and can be considered above the WP:SIGCOV threshold: [17], [18], [19], [20], [21] TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 02:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joyce Tamale

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Only source is the bank she works at and isn't a independent source. There is no evidence of notability. The article had already been moved to and out of draft space. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 21:08, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Almost no independent coverage. No notability. Takipoint123 (talk) 21:34, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Some interviews in media [22], but not enough for notability. Sourcing now in the article is primary. Oaktree b (talk) 21:42, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and Uganda. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:49, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Wish this article had stayed in draftspace awaiting sources. The only source I see is primary and non-independent. Signed, Guessitsavis (she/they) ^Talk 12:41, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Guru Mann

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Highly promotional in nature and questionable WP:SUSTAINED notability Amigao (talk) 19:58, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, Health and fitness, and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:47, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Only mentioned facts and statements about Guru Mann along with supportive news articles. Never used any promotional or advertising tone in this wikipedia article. Kindly don't delete it. Naanioffl (talk) 03:59, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Internet, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:17, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Only mentioned facts and statements about Guru Mann along with supportive news articles. Never used any promotional or advertising tone in this wikipedia article. Kindly don't delete it. Naanioffl (talk) 04:00, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Subject is poorly written and lack significant coverage to meet WP:SIGCOV Tesleemah (talk) 15:25, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Total 31 coverages are given. Please check the reference section. Naanioffl (talk) 19:26, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any awards or honour to meet notability guide as a actor? That's what I meant by no significant impact. There might be coverage of flimsy things the subject had done. If you can provide something more concrete then I might change my mind. Tesleemah (talk) 18:22, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comments: You do not have to WP:REFBOMB before you establish notability. Read on citation overkill and see how you can improve the article.
Delete: Totally promotional content, the references added in the article are also not reliable. Baqi:) (talk) 11:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No Promotional or advertising tone was used in the article. Everything is fact ans statement which are supported by India's top news sources. Sources are 100% reliable sources like The Times of India, Zee News, IMDb, Outlook India, Mid-day, Bollywood Hungama and more. 31 reference links are given in the reference section. Kindly Check. Thanks. Naanioffl (talk) 12:36, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kazi Rafiqul Alam

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previously speedy deleted and repeatedly recreated, but the last speedy deletion (A7) was declined. Article is heavily promotional with no indication of notability, with the first source clearly being paid promotion, and the second one being from the company he is the director of.

Doing a WP:BEFORE, many sources appear to talk about a homonym engaged in education and humanitarian work ([23], [24]), although the stated date of birth clearly shows that these are two different people. The one this article is about is said to be born in 1995, while the other apparently worked to set up a cancer hospital between 1994 and 1999. Yet another homonym appears to be the director of Alokito Bangladesh.

All in all, no indication of sources that could help meet WP:GNG for now. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:24, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Bangladesh. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:24, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, this page reads like an highlight piece. Taking a look at the logs, it might be worth salting as well. Signed, Guessitsavis (she/they) ^Talk 14:33, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable, vanity page.-KH-1 (talk) 04:49, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Looking at the page history, I have made myself WP:INVOLVED. I do note that the purported The Globe and Mail reference includes a by-line "GetNews - TGAM - GetNews - Mon Oct 23, 2023" which would appear to indicate that this paid content rather than genuine journalism.Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 10:00, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iain Rawlinson

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Bio of a successful businessman who does not appear to me to be notable. Somewhat promotional in tone, it recounts ROTM career moves but does not seem to be anything more than a piece of PR. Mccapra (talk) 11:00, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and United Kingdom. Mccapra (talk) 11:00, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:24, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fadaei

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An article that was moved from draftspace by the creator. The sources in the article are of poor quality, and a WP:BEFORE search comes up with nothing. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 22:06, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Businesspeople, and Iran. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 22:06, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Fadaei is one of the famous political Iranian rapper, but in Iran news sources are routine event recaps, And they don't cover the political rappers while the rappers should be arrested or under sentenced to death or in order to unkind them

AmirX0213 (talk) 09:50, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AmirX0213 What you're saying is, regardless of whether or not Fadaei qualifies for an article, it's a complex political situation. Right? I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 14:59, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, because hipHop music in Iran is illegal and The News source in Iran is Under control of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps ,but Fadaei is notable as he was one of the founder Moltafet music group and these days he manage this group and as a rapper his got General notability guideline AmirX0213 (talk) 16:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AmirX0213 Both for better and for worse, people can only be notable with significant mentions in multiple, independent/third-party, secondary sources. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 17:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@I dream of horses sure, by the way he got some sources which I mentioned them on his references and specially like bbc and he his highly searched on google. And in notable farsi sources they tried to unkind him. I didn't mentioned them in references AmirX0213 (talk) 18:44, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AmirX0213 Yeah, it seems that you're trying to add new sources, at least. I might look at the references later. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 21:45, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@I dream of horses thank you so much, at least 8 iranian notable sources added AmirX0213 (talk) 11:27, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the sources can be impvrove and he's notable as well

Farsadx (talk) 07:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:06, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Fadaei can be notable with significant mentions in multiple, independent/third-party, secondary sources too. please check here, here in two languages on BBC News was talked about his music. and other notable iranian sources which I mentioned them in article recently.

AmirX0213 (talk) 12:38, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Asoz Rashid

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previously deleted at AfD, and all sources given date from before the last AfD, so no indication that he became more notable in the meanwhile. Same issue as before, with the sources primarily being about iQ Group rather than the CEO himself. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:09, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Iraq. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:09, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It looks like the same issues are present as those in the article that was previously deleted. Hogo-2020 (talk) 10:10, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:16, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

JoonYong Park

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject seems to fail WP:GNG. Very little coverage in reliable, independent, secondary sources. Mostly primary sources... press releases, a few interviews which per WP:INTERVIEWS would be primary sources, and the one small independent secondary source (the AdAge piece, ref #1 and #7) is the same piece just republished. WP:BEFORE search just shows more primary sources, social media, LinkedIn posts, etc. RachelTensions (talk) 03:06, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. RachelTensions (talk) 03:06, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising, Internet, South Korea, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:37, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: as per nom. 𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 12:45, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already at AFD before so not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yashar Vafaei Mamaghani

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG. All of the sources (Turkish is my mother-tongue, so I examined all of them.) are promotional. The page needs to be deleted. Kadı Message 21:18, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Economics, Iran, and Turkey. Kadı Message 21:18, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I agree with the nomination rationale. The references are dated closely together, are similarly worded, and do not seem to reflect independent journalism. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 02:15, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Seems to satisfy WP:GNG, seen coverage in numerous sources. Some recent ones do seem to be around the same timeframe but from what I can see is from reputable and acceptable news websites. There seems to be older articles as well which aren't necessarily referenced in the article, but still demonstrate notability. Rob. H. Brodie (talk) 07:00, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rob. H. Brodie, please read this policy. Promotional content is not allowed on Wikimedia projects. Best, Kadı Message 13:26, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I have read and I don't find this applicable to me especially on the 'paid contribution'. If there are promotional texts in the article I'm happy to go and correct it. I'm even happy to add things that would be deemed negative to the subject if that's important and there are sources from it. But from what I have gathered and seen I don't think the article should be deleted on the basis provided above. It is in the best interest of Wikipedia to maintain articles that have acceptable sources, which I am confident this article has. Best Rob. H. Brodie (talk) 14:05, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:20, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, while I respect the reasoning behind the proposed deletion of Vafaei’s page, I believe the sources cited provide independent and impartial information. I see that he has been featured in many Turkish and global sources. Yashar Vafaei’s work, particularly his contributions in sustainable investment and economic development, holds significant value for society. The sources are not for promotional purposes but rather drawn from credible global sources that illustrate his impact in the business world and beyond. If there are sections that seem biased, I would be happy to assist in making necessary adjustments. I recommend preserving the page to continue offering valuable information to the public. Youtuberhakankeles (talk) 18:57, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Youtuberhakankeles, welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for your contributing to the discussion. I was wondering if you happen to know this individual in a personal or professional context? TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 20:18, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @TheJoyfulTentmaker, thank you for reaching out and for the warm welcome. Yes, I do know Yashar Vafaei and am familiar with his work. I’m here to contribute to this discussion to ensure that the article remains neutral and informative, following Wikipedia’s guidelines. I understand the importance of unbiased representation and would be happy to make any necessary edits to keep the content aligned with Wikipedia’s standards. Thank you for your guidance and feedback! Youtuberhakankeles (talk) 20:30, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mai Vũ Minh

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page was deleted under the title Mai Vu Minh (log). The statement "In 2016 he was elected as a people's deputy to the National Assembly of Vietnam and served in the economics committee" in this article is not correct, this name does not appear in the list of deputies elected to the National Assembly of Vietnam in 2016. Cherry Cotton Candy (talk) 04:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Vietnam. Cherry Cotton Candy (talk) 04:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as WP NPOL (as a Member of Parliament). I will find an alternative link for the political career, as the one previously provided appears to be broken.. Also notable as a businessman and billionaire. His diplomatic activities got decent media coverage in Bosnia newspapers too. --Limonis (talk) 10:20, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The source you added (https://www.entrepreneur.com/en-in/growth-strategies/exploring-vietnams-economic-path-a-guide-for-investors/472952) does not mention him as a member of Parliament. Cherry Cotton Candy (talk) 14:46, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source is not reliable to begin with for any claim, even if it was actually in the blog post. This is one of the entrepreneur contributor blog posts ("Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own")- a favorite target for UPDE scammers similar to the forbes contributor blogs. Perhaps we could look at the other blogs that the "author" posted to the site, like "How to Sell Feet Pics & Make Money: 10 Simple Steps". Sam Kuru (talk) 02:23, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and WP:Salt. He is a fake billionaire, see https://www.index.hr/vijesti/clanak/dodik-primio-laznog-milijardera-iz-vijetnama-ovo-je-tesko-prepricati/2095702.aspx. This article was deleted many times on English, Simple English and Vietnamese Wikipedia. Cherry Cotton Candy (talk) 01:49, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep seems to have enough media coverage on investment, diplomatic and civic activities. --Jiaoriballisse (talk) 11:31, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As a potential exaggerated /made up facts figure who still has substantial coverage in Bosnian, Serbian, and Croatian media. Even Euronews has a notable piece on him (which I’ve added to the page), discussing identity questions and issues surrounding the person.--ג'ימיהחיה (talk) 12:29, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ג'ימיהחיה: Can you supply some of those that post-date the euronews piece? I was unable to locate anything even remotely reliable. Sam Kuru (talk) 02:23, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I tried to clean up this article, but I haven’t changed my vote. Independent sources like Euronews aren’t enough to write a biography, and others repeat his unreliable claims. Cherry Cotton Candy (talk) 01:51, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete - The pre-2020 sources are useless given that they're part of a hoax per the Euronews source. There is an unbelievable amount of known, fake, blackhat SEO garbage blogs that are running PR pieces on him. Previous incarnations of this article (Draft:Mai Vu Minh and Mai Vu Minh) have used similar junk sources - fake forbes sites, paid advertorials, blackhat blogs and more. Clearly, there's a lot of SEO/paid editing in play. I can see the Mate Sam99 (talk · contribs) UDPE socks were at work at one point. This leaves us with no source for any real notability, a lot of fake sources, and one passing source showing that he's an interesting scammer. Not enough for a WP:BLP. Sam Kuru (talk) 02:23, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there are very different opinions of this article. User:Jiaoriballisse and User:ג'ימיהחיה can you identify the sources you think are reliable? Because those arguing for Delete says that most of the coverage of him is fake and even the article that you reviewed asserts this, too.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:00, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fake millionaires could be notable I suppose, but this doesn't seem to be. I'm not sure why Croatian and Serbian media are interested in a person from Vietnam. Meeting with xyz form Bosnia doesn't get you notability here either. I don't see this person as passing criminal notability over the alleged fake photos, so this isn't at all notable. Oaktree b (talk) 03:05, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Chandola

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP of a tech entrepreneur cum political candidate, not properly sourced as meeting inclusion criteria for tech entrepreneurs or political candidates. This was created in August, so it was clearly intended as a campaign brochure for his electoral candidacy -- but candidates do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates, and must demonstrate that they already had preexisting notability for other reasons.
But his "career background" as a tech entrepreneur is referenced entirely to primary sources that are not support for notability, but for one article in a suburban community hyperlocal that isn't enough to vault him over GNG all by itself -- and otherwise what's left for reliable sourcing is just the bog-standard run of the mill "party selects candidate" stuff that every candidate for every party in every electoral district can always show, not evincing any reason why his candidacy would qualify as a special case of more enduring significance than all the other candidates who failed to win the election yesterday.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable without better sourcing than this. Bearcat (talk) 15:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 15:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agree per reasons above, and the fact that Chandola has now lost the election, so notability through being an elected MLA cannot be established Epluribusunumyall (talk) 09:16, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Please do what is suitable with this page. Apandeyhp89 (talk) 16:39, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 15:47, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dipali Goenka

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A promotional biography of a businesswoman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Also, Wikipedia is not a resume hosting site WP:NOTRESUME. Also, the entire page is dominated by company references, while her personal references are limited to either WP:ROUTINE or WP:ADMASQ. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 05:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 05:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Maharashtra, and Rajasthan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There has been some misleading promotionalism in this article: in Recognition it said "Forbes magazine named her as the 16th most powerful woman in Asia and the 4th in India in 2016", but she was listed 16th in a list which explicitly states "this list -- which is presented alphabetically and is not intended to be a ranking". (I've edited this). This suggests that all sourcing needs very careful checking. PamD 08:11, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I’m not going to waste my time and yours with a detailed analysis of the made up in one day award and passing mentions. Suffice to say that she’s not notable. We’ve seen a lot of those pages, but in 2024 everyone knows we are not a free website listing everyone who runs a large business. Bearian (talk) 16:38, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep i am sorry but she is not the run of the mill businesswoman. She heads world’s one the largest textile companies. Forbes ranked her as the 16th most powerful woman in Asia. She has represented India at various international forums, including Harvard India and the World Economic Forum, and has chaired and served on the boards of major organizations. Agree with you and the page nomination about the promotional language in the article. Thus made significant improvements and removed promotional content/language and unnecessary sources and added more sigcov sources. There are lots of sources on google·Also created lawsuit for neutrality.she passes WP:GNG.Ashwithride (talk) 12:12, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Forbes lists her as the 16th, alphabetically, in a list of 50 most powerful women in Asia which explicitly says that it "is presented alphabetically and is not intended to be a ranking" (even if a Forbes India writer seems to misunderstand this). I corrected the statement in the "Recognition" section, but hadn't noticed that it was also misprepresented in the lead, which I have now corrected. The enthusiasm which some editors have for misrepresenting this listing makes one cautious about other claims, which should all be very carefully checked. PamD 13:06, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that User:Ashwithride created the article and appears not to have edited any other articles in en.wiki since creating their account on 9 July 20204. PamD 13:16, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that, in parallel, There was an attempt to remove controversies from Welspun Living's page on 13 February 2024, Welspun Corp's page got updated on 24 May 2024, Welspun Group name changed to Welspun World, and page got updated too on 12 June 2024; Dipali Goenka's page created on 10 July 2024, Welspun Enterprises' page created on 14 October 2024. Most of these pages are flagged for conflicts of interest, making it appear as if this year is especially focused on Welspun activity on Wikipedia. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:59, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. There is an unbolded Keep vote here from the article creator so I'm relisting this discussion. Please review changes made to the article by Ashwithride since its nomination and judge whether they have led to an improvement in this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:42, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Ashwithride added company-related information in Lawsuits, saying that the company was sued by American retailers for selling poor-quality products that were labeled as Egyptian cotton. However, there is not much detail provided on Dipali Goenka, and the cases were not directed at her. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 02:32, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Sorry to relist this discussion again but we need more arguments from editors on what outcome you would like with this article and why.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:05, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The creating editor has not replied to my question on their talk page a week ago as to whether they had COI, so it is difficult to WP:AGF that they have none, in view of their repeated misleading claim of "16th most powerful". PamD 06:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taylor Rousseau Grigg

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

May not meet WP:ENT or WP:SIGCOV. Minimal sourcing outside of her death. TJMSmith (talk) 01:52, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Fashion, Internet, and Texas. TJMSmith (talk) 01:52, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:09, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm not seeing what makes her notable. Her follower count isn't especially massive in comparison to the highest followed on the app, her business ventures aren't notable. Rusted AutoParts 03:13, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
she passed away. This is pretty heartless to delete her autobiography. If you died you would want your legacy to live on. I know her husband would want this to stay up as well. 174.27.213.42 (talk) 07:04, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia don't delete you have many other non famous people on here that are minor influences. 174.27.213.42 (talk) 07:13, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument. And no offence but what her husband might or might not want has no bearing on whether this remains as an article or not. Procyon117 (talk) 17:36, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with what is said above. Don't delete this article CallieCrewmanAuthor (talk) 14:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this is an edge case but there is more than passing mention coverage of the subject before her death and certainly after. Nnev66 (talk) 21:49, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep heartless to delete. Krazykatlady123 (talk) 07:25, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for new sources that apparently exist. The keep !votes should provide the references they think that show notability, rather than simply putting out a carpet term that notability exists.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please see previous Relisting comment.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not seeing how WP:GNG is met, and coverage of death is not enough. Melcous (talk) 08:38, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I personally believe that she is notable enough, and though the article is quite a stub, it does not seem fair to delete an article about someone who passed away. 68.230.53.144 (talk) 16:51, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

68.230.53.144, most of the biographical articles on Wikipedia are about people who have passed away. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:51, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Would appreciate a substantial !vote that evaluates the available sources, please.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 18:07, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: She only seems to be notable for dying. The article even states the person doesn't know what her appeal is on tik tok, she's deleted the app and didn't want to go viral. I don't see what their schtick was, like why were they so popular? Outside of passing away, there isn't much coverage of this person, besides getting married and not knowing what her fame is. Oaktree b (talk) 17:35, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I re-reviewed references that cover the subject before her death and only one has WP:SIGCOV but it's on an online media site called Celeb Secrets which doesn't have editorial oversight so it wouldn't be considered a WP:RS. Nnev66 (talk) 19:44, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Farragher, Thomas (November 14, 2019). "Saving the Garden movie house in Greenfield". Boston Globe.

[2] Olson, Kris (15 April 2021). "Lawyer, wife reopen theater complex bought just before pandemic hit". Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly.

[3] "Isaac Mass". BusinessWest. April 23, 2013. ISSN 1049-9822.

[4] "Greenfield lawyer Isaac Mass appointed to Massachusetts State Ballot Law Commission". masslive.com. 15 March 2012.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BlockMaster}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/3Sigma}}
-{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/APS – Audio Pro Solutions}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Culbann C.P.C (2nd nomination)}}
-{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Feasters}}
-{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FDI-Based Innovation: A Priority for Arab Countries}}
-{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pegasus Capital Group}}
-{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anacacia Capital}}
-{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Repossession Records (2nd nomination)}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Housing Investment Company}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Verdi Corrente Productions}}