Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scenera Research (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Scenera Research: Recommend move to FotoMedia article. |
Delete |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
**'''Comment''' I couldn't seem to locate [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scenera Research]], the first AfD process. Could someone kindly link to that, if it exists? Thanks in advance. [[User:Ubelowme|Ubelowme]] ([[User talk:Ubelowme|talk]]) 19:59, 23 June 2012 (UTC) |
**'''Comment''' I couldn't seem to locate [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scenera Research]], the first AfD process. Could someone kindly link to that, if it exists? Thanks in advance. [[User:Ubelowme|Ubelowme]] ([[User talk:Ubelowme|talk]]) 19:59, 23 June 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Delete'''I added more sources. I agree a move/merge to FotoMedia makes sense if its news coverage qualifies it as notable.--[[User:Zepheydog|Zepheydog]] ([[User talk:Zepheydog|talk]]) 22:54, 24 June 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Delete'''I added more sources. I agree a move/merge to FotoMedia makes sense if its news coverage qualifies it as notable.--[[User:Zepheydog|Zepheydog]] ([[User talk:Zepheydog|talk]]) 22:54, 24 June 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Delete''' Agree with the above. [[User:Callitlikeicit|Callitlikeicit]] |
|||
Revision as of 13:08, 25 June 2012
AfDs for this article:
- Scenera Research (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Entry is not worthy of wikipedia page (Notability, based on WP:NOTE and WP:CORP) and seems to have become a running argument between two parties which is beneath wikipedia.
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 June 16. Snotbot t • c » 16:31, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Comment – I have to point out that "a running argument between two parties" is all too typical of what wikipedia is about. But in this case it doesn't appear relevant as an AfD criteria. Regards, RJH (talk) 17:00, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia has dispute resolution practices. I don't recall article deletion being part of that process. I don't believe any attempt has been made to resolve any disputes for this pages.--Zepheydog (talk) 22:24, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:13, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
- Delete The only reference with in-depth coverage doesn't actually mention the name of this company. A move to FotoMedia might be worth considering if more refs come to light. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:37, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 18:26, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
- Delete through lack of reliable sources that specifically mention the name of the company in the head of the article -- or Merge/Move to FotoMedia as per Stuartyeates. I found nothing about Scenera Research that demonstrated any notability. I haven't looked to see if FotoMedia is notable (no time today). Ubelowme (talk) 19:56, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
- Comment I couldn't seem to locate Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scenera Research, the first AfD process. Could someone kindly link to that, if it exists? Thanks in advance. Ubelowme (talk) 19:59, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
- DeleteI added more sources. I agree a move/merge to FotoMedia makes sense if its news coverage qualifies it as notable.--Zepheydog (talk) 22:54, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Agree with the above. Callitlikeicit