Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Commendo


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 10:58, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Commendo
Article makes no assertion of notability, fails WP:CORP. --Alan Au 21:29, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * External references being added. Hope these will meet the notability assertions.  --Erik Hoogerhuis  22 September 2006
 * Keep. I see enough to satisfy WP:CORP, though feel the article is vanity cos, let's face it, it is written as a PR piece by Commendo and by Erik Hoogerhuis - part of company (0.9 probability), which is allowed, though inadvisable.  The article is in need of a serious cleanup (I tried with the ext refs, and also killed the multiple links to the corporate website so it not passes WP:NOT a linkfarm), and wikification, but it and Commendo itself do qualify for their place here.  Fiddle Faddle 23:01, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 *  AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Deathphoenix ʕ 04:37, 5 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Erik, all of the sources that you put in, in order: #1 is the corporate site, which is a primary source.  Encyclopedias being tertiary sources do not use primary sources, being original research.  However, it is okay as an external link.  #2 and #10 is just a partner-program mention, which is considered a "trivial mention" under the verifiability criteria.  #3 and #4 are real articles, but they too mention Commendo in passing (there was around 1-2 sentences on the company).  Moreover #4 is directly from a Commendo employee, which is a primary source.  #5 and #6 are wikis, not reliable (no fact-checking process at all).  The press coverage is usually quoted from press releases issued by the company, and therefore is also a primary source.  #7 and #11 are also only trivial mentions, and while #8 is a substantial article, it establishes the notability of Reynaldo Gil, not Commendo.  What you need is a magazine or newspaper article whose subject is the company in question. ColourBurst 07:11, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per ColourBurst. --Dhartung | Talk 10:47, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete nn, vanity. Recury 16:52, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per ColourBurst --Maelnuneb (Talk) 18:06, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete nn, fails WP:CORP
 * Delete does not meet notability stds.Glendoremus 03:05, 10 October 2006 (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.