Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global Reach Partners


 * 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. I'm sorry Mchart89 but there is a clear consensus here that this company does not pass WP:GNG. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:10, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Global Reach Partners

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I am not 100% sure of my case, but this looks much like advertising. The company itself is maybe notable, but also not very convincing. Not as much Google hits as you might expect from a noteworthy company. Night of the Big Wind talk  12:09, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:51, 6 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. a foreign exchange broker..... It provides foreign exchange services to corporate businesses and private individuals.  O RLY? The more you try to argue notability in Wikipedia in the article itself, the more obvious the spam becomes.  This one tries to parlay obviously incidental coverage (Over the past ten years Global Reach Partners have made many appearances on global television networks, commentating on economic and political events that impact on global currencies....) and petty trade awards (In April 2011 Global Reach Partners achieved The Carbon Neutral Company certification.) in hopes of getting the spam article kept.  It seems obvious that this article was inserted by a publicist who's made a superficial study of WP:N, hoping to get a client a Wikipedia article. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The changes have been amended. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mchart89 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 6 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. No independent sources are provided and I cannot find any, so it doesn't appear to pass WP:CORP. §everal⇒|Times 18:23, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I have amended the sources provided as well as the first point made. Preceding comment added by Mchart89 (talk 20:11,6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * As stated in WP:CORP, "A single independent source is almost never sufficient for demonstrating the notability of an organization." I only see two sources, one of which is a description of the company. The other appears to require some kind of login credentials.  The article is just a stub now so I'm ambivalent about deletion, but it won't progress beyond a stub without more detailed independent sources. §everal⇒|Times 17:44, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:GNG. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I have amended the changes so that they fulfill the WP:GNG requirements. Adding many more notable, independent and reliable sources, hope this helps to verify the page. Here is also a similar page which has been verified http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiFX Mchart89 (talk) 11:35, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I have axed out everything what was not relevant. You still have to proof that the company is noteworthy by giving reliable third party sources. Is it a coincidence that there is a marketing- en promotion campaign running? Night of the Big Wind  talk  17:03, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I have added third party sources after following http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Third-party_sources and extended the article so that it is not a stub. I think its just coincidental timing. Is there any other amendments I need to make? really hope this meets the spec now.Mchart89 (talk) 11:18, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you really think that the information about their move and the info about their sponsorships really tells something about the company? Night of the Big Wind  talk  12:31, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Not entirely, the 10.5billion transactions made, the 130 currencies which they deal with, the expert commentary they give on the foreign currency market on broadcasters such as BBC, CNN and CNBC is but that got deleted, I have added more relevant information and referenced it so I hope this is alight. It is my first article on wikipedia so I need your help so if there is any more advice you could give me to improve the article I would be very grateful. .Mchart89 (talk) 15:41, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * This is proving quite difficult to understand and provide the right third party sources.if there is still further amendments is it possible to gain further contact phone/e-mail about what constitutes correct sources as unfortunately I am still unclear. Thank you I look forward to hearing from you.Mchart89 (talk) 16:01, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree with Smerdis, this is totally WP:SPAM. Nothing special or noteworthy about this company. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 14:12, 13 October 2011 (UTC)


 * After reading WP:SPAM I have removed the Tommy Hill and GBmoto sponsorship so that it fits with the requirements and that there is no spam on the article.Mchart89 (talk) 15:31, 13 October 2011 (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.