Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Normanton Telecom Ltd


 * 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.  Sandstein  12:55, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Normanton Telecom Ltd

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable company that was founded just five months ago where the company does not meet WP:CORPDEPTH criteria. The sources of this article are all primary sources, excluding two sources (one for eBay, one for Amazon). I've done my research and can't find any sources that cover this article, even just passing mentions. There may be a conflict of interest with the original author because I simply can't find any evidence to back up anything on this article. st170e talk 20:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related page because the subject is the head of the company in question and is not notable:


 * st170e talk 21:21, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

The original page author has also expanded and written another article on the subject, which I am now also nominating for deletion because of a lack of notability:


 * st170e talk 18:08, 5 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. st170e talk  20:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. st170e talk  20:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. st170e talk  20:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Normanton Telecoms are a notable business - they are gaining publicity however they have not been reported online yet. They are working to gain wider publicity. Davemallins (talk) 21:04, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:TOOSOON. st170e talk 21:17, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete both I was unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources about Normanton Telecom Ltd and James Klaassen White. The two subjects fail Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 22:49, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Just corporate advertising. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:01, 4 June 2016 (UTC).
 * Delete - Unable to find anything to establish notability on all three of these subjects. The main article on the company only has directory sources that I can find. I am curious why all three are directed into one AfD instead of separate ones. Is there a benefit in doing so? --CNMall41 (talk) 20:18, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, they're all related pages created by the same author, whose sole aim was, in my opinion, to advertise/gain publicity for the company. See the above comment from the author. st170e talk 01:07, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree in the assessment that they are likely here to promote the subject of all three topics. Here is a more specific question. Let's "assume" (more likely than not) these articles are deleted. Given that promotional content is sometimes reposted, will it show the prior AfD for the two articles that are combined with this one? I guess I just want to make sure that if something is reposted and again nominated for deletion, it will show up with a prior AfD and not be considered the 1st. Hope that clarifies the question. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:32, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I understand your point and it is a fair one. It's my judgement that the other articles would not be able to survive if the main article (Normanton Telecom Ltd) didn't exist, because it is the main reason why the other two articles are on Wikipedia. st170e talk 01:12, 8 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete both by all means as there coverage is not all convincing and there would not be anything else better considering the company only started within the past 7 months, he's certainly not suggestive of his own notable article either and inherited notability because of the company is not acceptable. SwisterTwister   talk  05:45, 7 June 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.