Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Real Girls Media


 * 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 23:51, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Real Girls Media

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable company. References do not support notability. They provide only data on funding and are press releases from company. ttonyb1 (talk) 00:55, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  —MuffledThud (talk) 02:34, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as essentially promotional in nature. I've added the __NOINDEX__ magic word and disabled the link to the company's site for the moment; these edits shouldn't be reverted unless the outcome of the AfD is "keep".—The principle on Wikipedia is, first your organisation becomes notable and gets reviewed by third party reliable sources, then it gets a Wikipedia article.  You don't get to create the Wikipedia article as part of the quest to become notable in the first place.— S Marshall   Talk / Cont  01:36, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete for obvious reasons. Purely fails WP:N, with a lack of independent coverage.Spring12 (talk) 02:00, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - 2 out of 9 references were press releases. I have now removed one, which leaves independent coverage in seven articles by third party reliable sources, including the NYT and the SF Chronicle. It's a notable company.  MuffledThud (talk) 02:25, 24 March 2009 (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.