Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agency Republic (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   keep. -- Cirt (talk) 03:38, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Agency Republic
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

As with my previous nomination in March 2010, the only articles that provide significant coverage here are from one news source (Brand Republic) with several different names (Campaign Magazine, Marketing Magazine, etc). The articles are exactly the same, despite being sourced separately. In my opinion, this means the article fails to assert notability - as it does not have significant coverage in multiple independent sources. Also, the Campaign Big and Campaign Media awards this company won are sponsored by the same corporation (Again, Brand Republic). While their body of work is impressive, I still do not think this marketing firm meets notability requirements. Addionne (talk) 13:42, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.
 * Delete. Notability is just not an issue when an article is couched in floridly non-neutral and deliberately evasive advertising copy like this one is:
 * ...an interactive communications agency...
 * ...Creatively-driven, with a focus on Research & Development..
 * And, at any rate, the only claim made to minimal importance is a client list and a list of petty trade awards that do not confer notability. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:48, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:31, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep:. A significant and award-winning firm with plenty of references from reliable sources and not unduly promotional. It is clearly notable. - Ret.Prof (talk)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Keep The awards, though relatively minor, provide the necessary 3rd party sources, and market share is one factor in notability, so the client list is relevant.    DGG ( talk ) 02:26, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.