Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ipsos Business Consulting


 * 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. North America1000 06:09, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Ipsos Business Consulting

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Having looked at Google, there doesn't seem to be the depth of coverage needed to pass WP:GNG. Also, this page is currently just an advert masquerading as an article IMO. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC) Also quite a few passing mentions of stats they do. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:05, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - I see that all the "references" are from within the company, so no independent sources are given as evidence of notability. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:59, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Only mentions I can find are:
 * 1) - passing mention
 * 2) - mainly about new CEO
 * 3) - not In English, but think it's mainly about CEO
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  14:15, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  14:15, 17 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Appears to be run of the mill article spam. Citobun (talk) 14:20, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - very promotional sounding. In addition, one of the recent editors, Ipsosbc, has a username which suggests the user is associated with the company. LoudLizard (📞 | contribs | ✉) 19:33, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as none of this suggests better satisfying the companies notability, nearly even speedy and I would've tagged as such but the benefits of a closed AfD is G4. SwisterTwister   talk  06:39, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:15, 24 February 2016 (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.