Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prophet (company)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:27, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Prophet (company)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This one came to my attention after dealing with some persistent socks attempting to shill on Wikipedia (see User:Edwinboothnyc). Doesn't meet WP:CORP; only one of the references that meets WP:RS discusses the company beyond a mere mention ; the rest provide no real depth of coverage (one other one mentions Prophet more than once, but only because that article focuses on one of Prophet's execs). OhNo itsJamie Talk 23:57, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 21:16, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 21:16, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 21:16, 16 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Non quite notable enough. Google News Archive found mostly press releases. The references in the article are underwhelming. They spend a lot of time touting their role in famous rebranding projects, but the references make it clear that they were merely one element in a large team. The company which was the subject of the rebrand got the publicity; Prophet got a passing mention. --MelanieN (talk) 02:08, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, postdlf (talk) 05:16, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:24, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Only mentioned in passing, therefore not notable. 1292simon (talk) 00:49, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep not very notable, but the 2 main execs are both notable, the vp especially so, doesnt appear to be a chair filler, but is involved with the company heavily. of course, article needs to be trimmed back.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 05:32, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTINHERITED. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:44, 5 January 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.