Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DomLux


 * 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) 00:37, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

DomLux

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I cannot see evidence of notability, and Google News search finds only passing mentions. The only reference is to the company's own web site. This article has been nominated for CSD twice, and both times those nominations have been removed by anonymous ISP editors with no explanation. Gronk Oz (talk) 13:58, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 15:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete: An article on an estate agency firm, sourced to its own website. No evidence provided or found to indicate that this is more than a run-of-the-mill firm going about its business. (Searches obtain results for a similarly named Polish firm which appears to be unrelated.) Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 15:35, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete as this literally cares to, not only start with "The company's services and interests are....but then cares to note where to contact them and who their clients are", that's damningly enough for an advertisement and hence something unacceptable, therefore it wouldn't matter if it was notable, though in this case, it clearly is not. SwisterTwister   talk  06:49, 13 November 2016 (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.