Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amicus International Consulting


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  05:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Amicus International Consulting

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

It looks like most of the sources are actually press releases published on other news sites and podcasts. LinkedIn and the company website don't count, and a WP:BEFORE didn't turn up replacement sources. BuySomeApples (talk) 04:44, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:01, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:01, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:02, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  07:19, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete - not enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to pass WP:GNG. Onel 5969  TT me 10:45, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Fancy name with just 2 gnews hits and an orphan article. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 11:10, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete - There is a reference in the Digital Journal but based on byline it is native advertising. There is also this from the South China Morning Post but it's marked as an opinion piece. Other than that, everything is PR or churnalism. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Has no place here. Clear cut failure of WP:GNG MaskedSinger (talk) 07:06, 2 February 2024 (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.