Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Onlinelivenews24


 * 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 speedy delete per WP:A7, WP:G11, and a little WP:IAR. &mdash; MusikAnimal  talk  16:58, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Onlinelivenews24

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Exactly the same article has been deleted twice previously as A7. There is no real notability to this company, and no reliable sources to indicate any notability. This is a promotional article about a non-notable company, created by it's owner for free advertising. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:44, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per WP:G4 and possibly WP:A7; as the nominator says, this is a recreation of a page deleted twice under A7; see also this user page. In any case, that's promotional (Alexa rank above 750 000, hardly one of the world's most famous websites; "we have our representative" etc.; and other stuff) and there is no serious indication of notability. Tigraan (talk) 13:11, 24 April 2015 (UTC) Correction: G4 does not apply to pages that were speedy deleted. Tigraan (talk) 13:13, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Should have been clearer above, my A7 nomination was contested by another user, hence this AfD. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:15, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Damn, I guess I have to withdraw my own A7 nomination then. Tigraan (talk) 13:16, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Afraid so, sorry. I personally believe this is an obvious A7 candidate too, but it's been contested. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:20, 24 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. I declined the speedy nomination because I think the article's claim to notability is plausible. I think it's unlikely to pass, but the claim is at least plausible and so CSD isn't an appropriate process here.  But I agree that, in its current state, the topic doesn't pass GNG and so should be deleted if better sources can't be found. —Tim Pierce (talk) 14:10, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:35, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:35, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:35, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete - per nominator. - Arr4 (talk) 15:10, 24 April 2015 (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.