Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EG Innovations


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 01:01, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

EG Innovations

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article about a corporation that is merely a rehash of what they do. There is no assertion to notability whatsoever beyond routine news articles, press releases, non-reliable and primary sources. Fails WP:CORP. § FreeRangeFrog croak 19:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nom.  Jd 027  (talk) 20:37, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:58, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:58, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:58, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete The substantial reference is the UK Trade & Investment case study on assisting this firm to establish a UK office. However on balance I think that article is more about UKTI's assistance process than the firm in-itself, so doesn't demonstrate WP:CORPDEPTH notability for the article subject. AllyD (talk) 06:01, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * , who [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=EG_Innovations&oldid=560927072 originally added] the article, is a Morning277 sock-puppet. So is 54.241.200.213, who [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=EG_Innovations&diff=561127938&oldid=560961795 deleted] from the infobox the statement that the company's annual revenue is $3 million. The edits by ABTS-TN-Static-023.7.165.122.airtelbroadband.in also look to me as though they may be part of a PR effort. The writing style is an invitation to buzzword bingo. — rybec   00:57, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - references provided are all PR or self-published/ not-RS. The ZD net reference discloses at the bottom of the article, which is essentially a press release, that eG Innovations is client of the author, so non-neutral coverage there. Dialectric (talk) 08:00, 25 July 2013 (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.