Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mydala

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. (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:56, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mydala

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

plain advertising The Banner talk 23:29, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and clean up. A quick Google search brings up plenty of news from business news sites and the like which seem to confer notability. The article ain't great though, and could probably do with with a rewrite. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 23:43, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- This is not a case of doubtful notability, but a case of clear advertising. The Banner talk 15:18, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - That's solved by editing, not deletion. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 14:44, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and clean up. Agreed. The company exists and seems to be covered in news media. Kautilya3 (talk) 12:52, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 00:30, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 00:31, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Advertising is not actually a reason to delete here. Much stuff if put here as advertising, either companies or Wikipedia writers advertising something they are interested in. Instead if it can be converted to an encyclopedic tone then we can keep it when the topic itself is appropriate. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:39, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- We still have the policy Wikipedia:NOTADVERTISING. The Banner talk 22:56, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Significant coverage in reliable sources ultimately considered to be notable, but while going through the article it sounds like an advertisement which needs to be cleaned-up as above suggested and even I suggest, instead of dragging the article here for AfD discussion Advert template was making more sense. — CutestPenguin^Hangout 05:54, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and clean up. 200 million monthly views (even in a country as large as India) shows this clearly is a company of significance. It goes well beyond advertising, it turns it into a company a responsible informant for the world cannot ignore. That said, the advertising aspect of the content needs editorial help. That is not justification for an AfD as Dylanfromthenorth pointed out above. Trackinfo (talk) 17:32, 12 October 2014 (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.