Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Memento Exclusives


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 17:49, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Memento Exclusives

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

WP:COI article moved to mainspace, skipped AfC in contravention of policy. Paid editor created an article for this company and its founder, who is also up at AfD. In the case of Memento Exclusives/Memento Group, the sourcing does not support notability under WP:NCORP. Despite being a WP:REFBOMB, sources are almost exclusively WP:PRIMARYSOURCES like press releases, WP:INTERVIEWS or WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. Other coverage is limited to WP:TRADES publications, which do not contribute to notability for companies. Wikipedia is WP:NOTPROMO, and without sufficient WP:SIRS, this article doesn't clear the bar. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:10, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Motorsport,  and England.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:05, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete agree with the nom. All the independent coverage is not WP:SIGCOV and all the WP:SIGCOV coverage is not independent. Article moved to mainspace in clear contravention of WP:AFC rules for WP:PAID editors. No real claim to notability. Surprising to see an established editor with 4000+ edits and with apparent affiliation with Wikimedia act with such brazen disregard with settled policy.  Mel ma nn   19:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Strongest delete - "independent" coverage is limited to brief passing mentions ("X teamed up with subject to do Y", focusing on X and Y and not subject, with the sources often being closely related to X in the first place). Possibly worth reporting to WP:ANI due to being a paid article made in obvious violation of relevant policy. I do have to wonder what this "research" is that the user is undertaking that would cause such atrocious paid content to appear in mainspace. &#8213;  "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  23:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete – As above. 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 02:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: Oh I wanted to AFD this but thanks I saw this after voting from the founders page. A promotional WP:PE and doesn't meet WP:ORGCRIT. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 11:41, 3 June 2024 (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.