Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boutir

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 delete. Sandstein 08:20, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Boutir

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

Promotional spam.Nil notability. Winged Blades^Godric 06:47, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Jupitus Smart 06:39, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. Jupitus Smart 06:39, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Jupitus Smart 06:40, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, - TheMagnificentist 08:24, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Significant coverage in reliable sources. Non-english sources are acceptable for establishing notability. ~Kvng (talk) 14:13, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Please post links to what you consider to be the significant coverage in reliable sources. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 16:33, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ~Kvng (talk) 21:31, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The references in the article are either produced by the company or are announcements relating to funding. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:ORGIND and GNG. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 16:33, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:25, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless better sources can be found. The South China Morning Post article is a good start but everything else that I can read fails WP:CORPDEPTH. shoy (reactions) 18:07, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete as per User:Shoy. The Apple Daily article is only a paragraph. Matt's talk 08:57, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- an advertorial for an insignificant company. Insufficient reliable, independent sourcing. Basically spam. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:37, 28 July 2017 (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.