Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Driving-Tests.org


 * 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. Yunshui 雲 水 13:46, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Driving-Tests.org

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Has not shown significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Sources that have been used are a mishmash of classic passing mentions ("Car, motorcycle, and CDL practice tests and handbooks, presented in partnership with driving-tests.org." is the entirety of the Boston Public Library source), fake news sites (Industry News Corp clearly a company-written covert ad ), local stories (Palatine Library story by "community contributor" in a Chicago Tribune blog host ), or actually cover company advertising campaigns using their own campaign material, e.g. The Drive 2018. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:26, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.   Bait30   Talk? 03:51, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.   Bait30   Talk? 03:51, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.   Bait30   Talk? 04:22, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, buidhe 03:00, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:NCORP. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:17, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Doesn't satisfy WP:GNG or WP:NCORP. Dorama285 (talk) 18:37, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Obvious spam. Sources that look in-depth are just press releases. --MarioGom (talk) 12:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete No in-depth coverage by reliable, independent sources. This is clearly promotional; written by editor whose only contribution was this article, Glendoremus (talk) 16:18, 4 March 2020 (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.