Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nectar Online Media


 * 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. Courcelles 23:31, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Nectar Online Media

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable. No evidence of awards or in depth coverage in independent reliable sources. The only independent ref is http://www.businessinsider.com.au/heres-how-to-measure-twitter-influence-2013-2 which has no in depth coverage of the company. Only significant contributor to the article is an SPA with their userpage redirecting to the article. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:10, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete: a rather clear WP:SPA WP:COI by User:NectarOM14, with not only their userpage redirecting to the article but their user talk page was also redirecting to the article talk page. As to the substance and the key question of notability, I am not finding any. There is some brief coverage of the study that they co-sponsored in December 2012, which then got them that "in a recent survey" coverage two months later. But nothing to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 20:00, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 00:42, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 00:42, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:04, 18 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete The Google search I just ran returned lots of press releases and blogs, none of which satisfy WP:N. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:57, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete company of unclear notability, lacking significant coverage in RS with the exception of incidental mentions and in relation to the above-mentioned survey. A search did not turn up significant RS coverage. As above, created by a WP:SPA as likely spam/promotional.Dialectric (talk) 12:48, 21 December 2013 (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.