Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CVIC SE


 * 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. § FreeRangeFrog croak 17:41, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

CVIC SE

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced orphan with indication of notability that fails to meet GNG and NCORP 3gg5amp1e (talk) 19:01, 12 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Obvious keep, and I've already reverted the nom's ridiculous attempts to tag-bomb this article. It's fully referenced – inline citation is not and has never been compulsory on Wikipedia. Mogism (talk) 19:04, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * What sources?
 * CVIC SE's Homepage? Not a reliable source.
 * CVIC SE's Alternate English Homepage? Not a reliable source.
 * China Outsourcing Forum? Not a reliable source.
 * The University of Regina? University website, says nothing about the topic.
 * Shandong University website (Chinese)? Not English and Google was not able to translate it, so I have no idea, but the other "sources" suggest this is just the Homepage for the university and doesn't mention the topic.
 * Shandong University website (English)? 404 not found, doesn't even exist, not reliable.
 * Jing Xinhai Receives an Honour at the Fall 2003 Convocation at the University of Regina? This is about Jing Xinhai and not CVIC SE.
 * I also don't appreciate being called disruptive or ridiculous in a tone that appears to attack me like if we are on a battleground in some war or something. Thanks. 3gg5amp1e (talk) 19:49, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:53, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:53, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:53, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Comment all current sources are affiliated, but I've found news coverage: The Register, Financial Times. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 11:02, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete None of what's on the page is a reliable source and the two added above by Qwertyus are a passing mention for the first one and the second is accessible behind a pay-wall. —  17:26, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - I agree that The Register source is just a name-drop; we can't dismiss the Financial Times just for being behind a paywall, however. One thing that obviously hasn't been considered here; Chinese language sources. Now, obviously I don't speak Chinese, and Google Translate is hopeless for Chinese translation, but appears to be an in-depth piece about the company (dates line up with what the article here says, it needs a proper translator), and another source that may also be useful is . There are probably more out there for those who speak Chinese.  Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 19:05, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:31, 20 May 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:18, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. No sources present to suggest it passes WP:GNG or Notability (companies). User:Mogism, please read my op-ed at Wikipedia Signpost/2015-04-08/Op-ed so you can understand why User:3gg5amp1e deletion should be commended - we need to stop this kind of spam before we drawn in it. User:Lukeno94 makes a valid point that there may be Chinese language sources, but until their existence is confirmed, we cannot assume they exist and keep the article on the "maybe". --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:28, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: I have to concur with the above. In addition to the wild wild east of commercial adventurism, there is something worrisome about the name-creep of "Civic SE," a well known and popular search term for a common Honda car sold in the U.S., and this title. I'm not suggesting this is conscious "errorspace engineering," but in the absence of solid documentation the naming is another concern. Hithladaeus (talk) 13:21, 27 May 2015 (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.