Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hevilift (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  So Why  09:07, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Hevilift
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable company. Only coverage I can find is pretty WP:MILL. CHRISSY MAD ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  17:00, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:30, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:30, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:30, 23 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. No evidence of passing WP:NCORP. Ajf773 (talk) 21:50, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete blatant advert. 2 of the 3 sources are primary.  LibStar (talk) 22:06, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete promotional! Light2021 (talk) 11:04, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

What aspect of this page is promotional? It does not show any commercial contact information or provide any glowing reference. Aprilleigh1234 (talk) 22:27, 25 June 2017 (UTC)Aprilleigh1234
 * Creation of page in Wikipedia itself for positioning online and having link is promotional if its purpose is nothing encyclopedic, helong search engine results, Wikipedia provides strongest link building and credibility. it is being misused. Light2021 (talk) 05:01, 26 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - no evidence of any notability. Another air charter company.  Velella  Velella Talk 22:30, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and GNG -- HighKing ++ 15:18, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete and possibly salt, fails notability guidelines as all mentions in sources are trivial. —  Quasar   G.  23:19, 26 June 2017 (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.