Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brandrally


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 03:01, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Brandrally

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable firm that does not meet WP:ORG. No evidence of notability provided. The only "reference" provided does not actually refer to the subject at all, but is simply a link to the ASIC website. Mattinbgn\talk 03:26, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:26, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: No reliable sources that show notability per WP:CORP. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 03:31, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Notability has not been established. Blatant spam and conflict of interest by single purpose account with same name as article.   - Boston (talk) 03:56, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 04:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator & above. --Nick—Contact/Contribs 04:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. No independent citations, fails WP:ORG. WWGB (talk) 13:03, 9 December 2008 (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.