Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Safe Creative (2nd nomination)


 * 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   no consensus. with no prejudice against speedy renomination (non-admin closure) czar   &middot;   &middot;  14:24, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Safe Creative

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete for lack of notability and references. Previous AFD in March 2011 failed for lack of discussion.
 * No references/sources to this for-profit company in the copyright registration business. A notability template has been placed on this article for a long time with no improvement, and no signs of improvement.  It appears to be primarily a promotional piece, although much of the promotional language has been cleaned up.
 * The only contributor of content has been the page creator (User:Oneras, separately notified of this discussion); other editors have contributed clean-up and content removal of biased information.
 * All mentions of this organization appear to be in conjunction with businesses otherwise affiliated with this for-profit service, with the sole exception of Plagiarism Today, which is a blog (& business) that covers plagiarism- and copyright-related businesses.

An article might be written about this industry (copyright registration assistance) in which this content could be merged, but I don't see any notability in this company otherwise. Lquilter (talk) 18:15, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2013 April 11.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  18:29, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Oy, it's been a long time since I've AFD'd an article. Please forgive delays while I re-acquaint myself with the various templates/procedures. --Lquilter (talk) 18:53, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2013 April 11.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  19:02, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

There are also references from Creative Commons besides PlagiarismToday, and also from WIPO official study on private online registries. Also I've added new references appearing in most prominent media in Spain, including National TV RTVE, about agreements with both official Spain Registrars and Movie Producers Collecting Society. --Oneras (talk) 10:29, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:31, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:31, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:31, 12 April 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Theopolisme ( talk )  01:02, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Delete fails WP:GNG. the sources are small mentions only. LibStar (talk) 08:57, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone  13:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * weak Keep borderline notability ; Plagiarism Today, tho in format a blog, is a responsible publication--the deciding factor for me is that this is an an appropriate length non promotional article.  DGG ( talk ) 15:47, 26 April 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.