Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MOR cosmetics


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 12:02, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

MOR cosmetics

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

After having MOR Cosmetics CSD'd multiple times and salted, along comes MOR cosmetics: highly promotional, vague notability, and highly questionable as an encyclopedic article. ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 10:09, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: 5 editors now blocked as socks based on the 6 incarnations of this article. See here for details ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 11:39, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.
 * Delete and salt to establish a firm precedent. This text is substantially identical to the prior versions speedily deleted as unambiguous advertising the previous five times.  Lists of minor trade awards do not confer notability, and this remains unambiguous advertising.  - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:27, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Per WP:SPAM, article seems to be promotional in nature. Tyrol5   [Talk]  21:57, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete and salt, as above. I'm all in favour of giving articles a second chance, but if they keep on reappearing as spam... bobrayner (talk) 23:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, season according to taste. I tried to find something good here, I really did, but most of the refs I found were for minor trade/magazine awards, and even then I struggled to source most of them. Other refs were stores stocking product. Charitable work and sponsorship also suffered from a lack of sources. There's insufficient "depth of coverage"; insufficient "evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media"; and insufficient coverage by "independent, reliable publications in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, television documentaries, websites, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations"; and MOR cosmetics isn't traded on the ASX. Fails WP:NCORP, fails WP:GNG. TFOWR 11:57, 19 October 2010 (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.