Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PLB Group 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:01, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

PLB Group Ltd

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Company profile written like advert with no sources other than company website. Orphaned since 2006. Rhododendrites (talk) 21:42, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:40, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:40, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wine-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:41, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:41, 1 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom - Nothing but an advert which should've been CSD'd years ago.- Davey 2010 T  01:49, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete I found one of their wines discussed in a list and a couple of trademark notices but that was all; fails WP:CORPDEPTH. If this does survive AfD, the large chunks of WP:COPYVIO (of this and possibly other pages) would need to go. AllyD (talk) 07:31, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete - Its got a claim of notability, but nothing to back it up. 209.255.230.32 (talk) 12:28, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not much to improve this article. The Guardian mention is minor and a Google News search found some links but nothing obviously significant. One of the links, Harpers Wine & Spirit Trade Review, is dead but I found a second link (not significant either) after searching. A search at The Telegraph and East Grinstead Courier and Observer provided nothing. Additional searches at BBC and West Sussex Gazette provided nothing either. Small article for a rather seemingly small company. SwisterTwister   talk  19:55, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep -- A company with a turnover of £142M ought to be notable. Yes it is a bad article and needs wikifying, but that is not a reason for deletion.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:16, 8 November 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.