Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CARiD (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. Kurykh (talk) 05:36, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

CARiD
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * Queried speedy delete. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:33, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2017 January 26.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 22:54, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as clear advertising and what existed is hardly significant at all since it's only a business listing, WP:NOT applies as always. SwisterTwister   talk  23:53, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete. In the previous nomination the consensus was to delete and this article may be to be similar to the deleted article (has no reliable sources and is advertising ) and should be speedy deleted under CSD:G4 -KAP03(Talk &bull;&#32;Contributions) 00:50, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep A question of notability and weather there is a place for this subject on Wikipedia may not have a lot of sense in this particular situation, as this article existed on Wikipedia and was linked-to for at least a year, until the moment when it was filled with promotional content, which basically triggered the first deletion nomination. In my submission I was looking to make it even more neutral than it was originally when it was approved by editors. I tried to avoid mentioning notable facts in the social and financial sphere of the subject and only referred to bare numbers and key points, in order not to make it sound as any sort of advertisement, as there is a fine line in determining whether such facts are used in promotional context or function as illustration of notability in the category of business subjects like this. Basically most references of articles about business, enterprises or corporations on Wikipedia may be interpreted as a result of their promotion campaigns even when they're subtle and claim to be notable. While I agree with you that Wikipedia is not a platform for promotions and business listing and not trying to question it in any way, one other fact that influenced my decision to give a try on recreating this article is that CARiD page used to be mentioned and linked-to by other notable articles within the automotive category of Wikipedia itself, such as Automotive aftermarket; plus there is also an appropriate category that directly corresponds with the subject Category:Automotive part retailers of the United States, which serves as interlinking of these pages and potentially improves the Wikipedia knowledge base.Denholm78 (talk) 10:10, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Additional references added. Denholm78 (talk) 16:42, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The new reference seems to only trivially mention the subject making it not meet the WP:GNG guideline. -KAP03(Talk &bull;&#32;Contributions) 00:14, 28 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. The current version has even fewer references than that deleted after the previous AfD. &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:39, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete As per above. Light2021 (talk) 17:49, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per ST's comment. Chrissymad  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  20:44, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:CORPDEPTH -- HighKing ++ 15:27, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete No assertion of notability. Primary authors are SPA's.  caknuck °  needs to be running more often  03:50, 3 February 2017 (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.