Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/O'Connor Communications: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m →O'Connor Communications: sp |
|||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"><span style="color: #FF4F00;">'''[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /> |
<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"><span style="color: #FF4F00;">'''[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /> |
||
<small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Northamerica1000|NorthAmerica]]<sup>[[User_talk:Northamerica1000|1000]]</sup> 02:01, 27 December 2014 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|O'Connor Communications]]</div> |
<small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Northamerica1000|NorthAmerica]]<sup>[[User_talk:Northamerica1000|1000]]</sup> 02:01, 27 December 2014 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|O'Connor Communications]]</div> |
||
*'''delete''' I don't see independent coverage of this company so it doesn't meet the coverage requirements of [[WP:GNG]].[[Special:Contributions/75.150.214.113|75.150.214.113]] ([[User talk:75.150.214.113|talk]]) 18:30, 2 January 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 18:30, 2 January 2015
- O'Connor Communications (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)
Promotional article tagged for notability since more than a year ago. Citations used are not reliable or do not actually contain much information on the company. A quick search at the leading trade magazine, PRWeek, confirms user:Peter James' comment on the Talk page; the founder may have a shot at notability, but the company does not. A discussion for another day. CorporateM (Talk) 16:02, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:53, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:53, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
- Delete due to WP:NOTINHERITED. While the founders' book is notable, their business is clearly not even close to being notable per WP:CORPDEPTH; I don't see any significant analysis of the company in reliable sources. The cites given are to blogs, press releases, a social media site, conference reports (possibly self-reported biographies), and the the company's website. Bearian (talk) 19:59, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Per Bearian. The subject's business venture is not notable. A large portion of the article is about the founders, while another large section provides a laundry list of clients without any analysis. I eat BC Fish (talk) 04:55, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:39, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:39, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 02:01, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 02:01, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- delete I don't see independent coverage of this company so it doesn't meet the coverage requirements of WP:GNG.75.150.214.113 (talk) 18:30, 2 January 2015 (UTC)