Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Di-Cypher: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 05:14, 26 November 2015

Di-Cypher

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

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

Heavily promotional article of a newly formed company of questionable notability. The sources are mainly primary (the companies own website, or self entries) with the only one of any interest (CNN) does not even mention the company. Claims are not supported by any reliable third party references. This article had been heavily tagged with issues (advert, coi, peacock, primary sources, one source, disputed) by more than one editor including a speedy by myself but the result was just a continuous deletion of tags without any attempt to address the issue. Tag deletion is not a reason for AfD I know just the timing.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:37, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 14:18, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 14:18, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: A WP:SPA article on a company. Nothing on Highbeam or Questia, Google just returns the usual social media. A company going about its business; no encyclopaedic notability. AllyD (talk) 19:03, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A WP:SPA article on a company. Google returns the social media with celebrities and fighters using the company. A company going about its business; some encyclopaedic notability. Comoncents85 (talk) 20:45, 25 November 2015 (UTC) This template must be substituted.[reply]

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 :({{Find sources AFD|DiCypher}})
 :({{Find sources AFD|DCypher}})
+:({{Find sources AFD|Di-Cypher MMA}})
 Heavily promotional article of a newly formed company of questionable notability.  The sources are mainly primary (the companies own website, or self entries) with the only one of any interest (CNN) does not even mention the company.  Claims are not supported by any reliable third party references. This article had been heavily tagged with issues (advert, coi, peacock, primary sources, one source, disputed) by more than one editor including a speedy by myself but the result was just a continuous deletion of tags without any attempt to address the issue.  Tag deletion is not a reason for AfD I know just the timing.[[User:PRehse|Peter Rehse]] ([[User talk:PRehse|talk]]) 10:37, 25 November 2015 (UTC)