Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GfK NOP


 * 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.  Sandstein  10:02, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

GfK NOP

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. Philafrenzy (talk) 01:18, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 15:44, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 15:44, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 15:44, 23 January 2014 (UTC)


 * delete Lack of independent sources. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:50, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * delete with a vengeance as per all previous BlueSalix (talk) 17:21, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete: A Highbeam search turns up announcement PR coverage but nothing that indicates WP:CORPDEPTH notability. AllyD (talk) 22:00, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge to GfK, the parent company, or just redirect as I'm not sure there's much in this article that's not in that one and that's worth keeping. There are a couple of dozen articles with links to GfK NOP, and I see no reason to turn those links into redlinks when there's a perfectly reasonable target. Qwfp (talk) 11:15, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not seem to meet WP:CORP and it lacks WP:RS. Mkdw talk 23:18, 31 January 2014 (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.