Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Azam Marketing: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Realkyhick (talk | contribs) |
Markbristol (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
* '''Speedy delete''' As per above no notiable sources are in or found for article [[User:Staffwaterboy|<span style="color:red; cursor: help;"><b>Staffwaterboy</b>]] [[User_talk:Staffwaterboy|<sup>Critique Me</sup></span>]] 22:47, 4 September 2010 (UTC) |
* '''Speedy delete''' As per above no notiable sources are in or found for article [[User:Staffwaterboy|<span style="color:red; cursor: help;"><b>Staffwaterboy</b>]] [[User_talk:Staffwaterboy|<sup>Critique Me</sup></span>]] 22:47, 4 September 2010 (UTC) |
||
**I tried that; it was contested. (I forgot to mention that in the nomination, sorry.) - [[User:Realkyhick|Realkyhick]] <small>([[User talk:Realkyhick|Talk to me]])</small> 22:55, 4 September 2010 (UTC) |
**I tried that; it was contested. (I forgot to mention that in the nomination, sorry.) - [[User:Realkyhick|Realkyhick]] <small>([[User talk:Realkyhick|Talk to me]])</small> 22:55, 4 September 2010 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' - There is actually significant coverage online from [[WP:Reliable sources]]. Over 30,000 listings for this agency in Google alone. The agency is 13 years old, and works with brand name clients. I have now added lots of references added because comments said "This article needs references that appear in reliable third-party publications". Is that OK? Similar, but significantly smaller and newer agencies have a listing on Wikipedia e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7thingsmedia [[User:Markbristol|Markbristol]] ([[User talk:Markbristol|talk]]) 01:19, 5 September 2010 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 00:23, 5 September 2010
- Azam Marketing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Company does not appear to be notable. Looks like it was posted by an employee or PR person working for the company -- editor is a new account, and his only other edit was on a related article about a web site this company runs (since speedy-deleted). Only one reference that might be considered reliable, and that's just not enough. I suspect self-promotion. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 22:34, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete - Fails WP:COMPANY; no significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources. Nanodance (talk) 22:41, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- Speedy delete As per above no notiable sources are in or found for article Staffwaterboy Critique Me 22:47, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- I tried that; it was contested. (I forgot to mention that in the nomination, sorry.) - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 22:55, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - There is actually significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources. Over 30,000 listings for this agency in Google alone. The agency is 13 years old, and works with brand name clients. I have now added lots of references added because comments said "This article needs references that appear in reliable third-party publications". Is that OK? Similar, but significantly smaller and newer agencies have a listing on Wikipedia e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7thingsmedia Markbristol (talk) 01:19, 5 September 2010 (UTC)