Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Venture Cup Danmark


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:27, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Venture Cup Danmark

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unreferenced, self promotion/advert with no evidence of notability Theroadislong (talk) 14:29, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Strong delete - Both the Danish and English articles are hopelessly promotional and, despite cleaning, the article continues to read like an advertisement. To my disgust, the article read like promotional trash prior to last month's cleaning. To my additional dismay, the article has existed since October 2007 and has remained the same, with no significant change. Google News found one result here (the first result) but it was a dead link. I attempted to retrieve it from mva.org and web.archive.org but with no success. Google Books found one result here (scroll to the bottom of that page) but it reads like an advertisement. Google Books also found one small mention here. Honestly, considering that both articles have been heavily edited by people affiliated with the group, the Danish article needs to be rewritten and subsequently translated. It is possible that reliable sources may be Danish and not English, but it's not easy to tell, and it appears that there is no existing Google Danmark news service. SwisterTwister   talk  22:58, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:47, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:47, 3 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Deleteas promotional and non-notable. I would consider G11, but considering the article in the Danish WP, it would be a ebetter signal for them if we do it formally.  DGG ( talk ) 04:12, 9 October 2012 (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.