Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Current Affairs (Event Planning and Production Company)


 * 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. Courcelles (talk) 04:37, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Current Affairs (Event Planning and Production Company)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Contested proposed deletion, not mine. This is an essentially advertising article about an event planning business that fails to establish significance. While it apparently has references, they all appear to be puff pieces in minor trade publications with local or limited readership. There's no indication that this business "has had any significant or demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education." And while the fact that The company has a staff of 10 may not in itself establish non-notability, the article does not really say anything that suggests that they aren't just another firm in the field. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:15, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hawaii-related deletion discussions.
 * Weak keep - it is spammy, but several of the sources look reliable - in particular the business journals, which are syndicated and well-known. It seems, therefore,  to be barely notable.  I am leaning towards a keep, but the "peacock language" has to go. Bearian (talk) 16:19, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. That some of the sources may be reliable, I grant.  But I'm not sure that anything they say, or for that matter anything the article says, establishes the "long-term historical notability" of this business. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 02:07, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * True! That's why I think it's a weak keep. Bearian (talk) 16:42, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable. The sources are very unimpressive - mostly press releases plus a few "business briefs". One actual article, in the Pacific Business News, about the company/its founder, dating from 2008. IMO this doesn't amount to "significant coverage in independent reliable sources." --MelanieN (talk) 04:55, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete Re-hashing press releases and appearing in local business briefs is not substantial coverage. Miami33139 (talk) 02:49, 16 July 2010 (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.