Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Certified Payroll Professional (2nd nomination)

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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:26, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Certified Payroll Professional

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

Non-notable product that lacks significant third party coverage. Product is a so-called professional designation issued by a private company for a fee. Over half of the article was a copy-paste copyvio. Half of what is remaining is a big quote from a single book. The whole thing reads (or read) more like a commercial than an encyclopedia entry. Niteshift36 (talk) 02:40, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 02:51, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:12, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless this can be convincingly improved or also simply moved elsewhere instead. SwisterTwister talk 03:07, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG ,lack of coverage in RS and the copy vio concernAtlantic306 (talk) 05:35, 1 February 2016 (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.