Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Private placement platform


 * 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. Tone 13:41, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Private placement platform

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Unsourced article, has been kicking around for a couple of years, orphaned, and appears to be a spam magnet. Discovered this while Huggling when it was one long advertisement. Now stubbified. A search of Google News shows one Reuters news story from 2007, concerning a venture not mentioned in this article and unclear if there are more than that, suggesting that the topic simply does not meet notability criteria. Created by an SPA; original version itself questioned notability, saying "real programs are out there, finding them is the hard part." Should be deleted or merged with private placement. ScottyBerg (talk) 12:55, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:07, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep? Here is an explanation of them, not sure how common they are tho. Mangoe (talk) 22:24, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of notability. (The "explanation" linked by Mangoe is a paper written by the marketing director of a business trading in the area. It is not substantial coverage.) The history of the article is full of spam, unattributed opinion, copyright violation, and downright lies. The versions of it which are free from such problems have very little useful content, and the article has never been sourced. In short, there is absolutely nothing worth keeping, and, since there is no evidence of notability, it should go. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:13, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete There are no sources cited, and nothing indicates that the term has widespread use. Elton Bunny (talk) 12:32, 3 November 2011 (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.