Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Techno Herald


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:25, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Techno Herald

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No coverage by independent sources to pass WP:GNG. Article has been created to promote a little-known, for-profit organization that prepares students for competitive exams in India. Previous CSD and PROD were contested by the creator of the article, whose username suggests a possible WP:COI. Though there is a claim in the article's talk page that this institution has changed the educational landscape of the Indian state of Bihar, I see no independent sources to back this up (in the article) or anywhere else on the web. — Stringy Acid (talk) 20:41, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. — Stringy Acid (talk) 20:46, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. — Stringy Acid (talk) 20:46, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — Stringy Acid (talk) 20:46, 20 March 2017 :(UTC)


 * Delete: Does not appear to met WP:GNG. A search does not yield suitable independent sources that cover this organisation. Arunram (talk) 14:47, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Very weak keep: There are no citations. If authors can improve the article with citations, keep the article for now. --Oskinet (talk) 03:03, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Improving the article "with citations" can be done, but on what basis should this article be kept? This article does not in any way pass WP:GNG! And the reason I nominated this article for deletion is because I couldn't find any reliable sources to cite. — Stringy Acid (talk) 09:29, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:52, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:PROMO; strictly corporate spam on an unremarkable private company. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:14, 2 April 2017 (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.