Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KeepCalling


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:46, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

KeepCalling

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Challenged PROD. The PROD reason was: "Advertorial with examinations finding the listed sources to be nothing but PR or PR-like "coverage", the author moved it themselves after having it repeatedly declined, and not actually listening to my concerns listed. This is likely even a secretly paid contributed article considering the author was so avid to fluff this with PR and move it themselves." I concur, this is blatant advertising. I conducted a source check myself and was deeply unimpressed. An IP removed the PROD saying "Reliable sources available in other languages", but note that the article doesn't even have an article in those other languages. David Gerard (talk) 11:05, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 11:05, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 11:06, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 11:06, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete per WP:PROMO -- blatant advertisement and dodgy (likely COI) behaviour. Perhaps salt, so that volunteer editors' time is not wasted again. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:43, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete No independent reliable sources found in English. Most of the sources in the article are Romanian and I can't fully evaluate them, but they are probably press releases and other trivial mentions as there is nothing in the US for this US based company.  I also note that the article was created by an SPA who has only edited this article an another promotional, declined draft. MB 02:52, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with both of you. Not enough to assert WP:ORG. Translated the sources. Roughly 70% are advertorial of some kind. The others discuss the company sponsoring 30 university students, paying fees for the first year.  Scope creep (talk) 21:46, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. The sources are weak. Pyrusca (talk) 23:46, 14 September 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.