Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valiram Group

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Valiram Group

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

Article appears to be naked advertising WP:SPAM. No references are cited and no effort is made to establish notability in the article. Article's creator and various editors appear to be connected to or employees of the subject corporation. Article was previously cited for copyright violation, direct copy and paste from subject's Linked In page. Linked In page was subsequently deleted. Article was tagged for conflict of interest, no sources, advertisement, and lack of notability. Article was also tagged PROD. PROD tag & maintenance tags were all subsequently removed without explanation or any corrections to the article. A quick Google failed to turn up any WP:RS sources establishing notability. Am I missing something here? Let me know if I am pulling the trigger too quickly. Ad Orientem (talk) 18:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Seems to be spam and fails WP:GNG.--Jeffrd10 (talk) 19:07, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: A corporate article by a WP:SPA; Highbeam turns up various articles in New Straits Times and Malay Mail but they are syndicated PR announcements rather than the in-depth WP:RS coverage about the firm as required for WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 20:17, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not seem to cover a notable subject per WP:NOTABILITY 3er40 (talk) 21:35, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:14, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:14, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Couldn't find enough independent reliable coverage. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:52, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lack of WP:RS and WP:SIGCOV. The article has some advertising issues but those are lesser concerns. Mkdw ^talk 21:25, 27 January 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.