Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ogilvy CommonHealth Asia Pacific: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Creating deletion discussion page for Ogilvy CommonHealth Asia Pacific. (TW) |
Majulah1965 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
:({{Find sources AFD|Ogilvy CommonHealth Asia Pacific}}) |
:({{Find sources AFD|Ogilvy CommonHealth Asia Pacific}}) |
||
Article fails [[WP:GNG]] and [[WP:NORG]]. Article's sources are nothing but press releases and blogs from the company. Not a single source in the article is a third-party source that provides significant coverage to the article's subject. [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] ([[User talk:Aoidh|talk]]) 13:26, 28 March 2016 (UTC) |
Article fails [[WP:GNG]] and [[WP:NORG]]. Article's sources are nothing but press releases and blogs from the company. Not a single source in the article is a third-party source that provides significant coverage to the article's subject. [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] ([[User talk:Aoidh|talk]]) 13:26, 28 March 2016 (UTC) |
||
::That's simply not the case. A significant portion of sources are from a varied set of media types (for instance, news reports). Press releases and primary sources are primarily used in the background section (delineating the company's establishment and the reason put forth by its parent corporation to establish it) and in the section on notable Staff. [[WP:NORG]] and [[WP:GNG]] simply do not support the extreme and pedantic argument you put forth against this article. [[User:Majulah1965|Majulah1965]] ([[User talk:Majulah1965|talk]]) 14:22, 28 March 2016 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 14:22, 28 March 2016
- Ogilvy CommonHealth Asia Pacific (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)
Article fails WP:GNG and WP:NORG. Article's sources are nothing but press releases and blogs from the company. Not a single source in the article is a third-party source that provides significant coverage to the article's subject. Aoidh (talk) 13:26, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
- That's simply not the case. A significant portion of sources are from a varied set of media types (for instance, news reports). Press releases and primary sources are primarily used in the background section (delineating the company's establishment and the reason put forth by its parent corporation to establish it) and in the section on notable Staff. WP:NORG and WP:GNG simply do not support the extreme and pedantic argument you put forth against this article. Majulah1965 (talk) 14:22, 28 March 2016 (UTC)