Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vipac


 * 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. bd2412 T 20:37, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Vipac

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Only employs 100 people. Probably non-notable company, failing WP:NCORP, and created by a WP:SPA. Extensive "awards" section - the most recent are both vanity awards, sceptical about the others. Edwardx (talk) 13:04, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:59, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:59, 30 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep There is I think sufficient WP:NEXIST to keep this article. "only employs 100 people" - not a reason for deletion - notability is not conferred by the number of employees.  NOM has only ided 2 of 17 awards as vanities.   "probably not notable" - why - what WP:BEFORE did NOM do.  There are easy to find standard google search results for partnerships with major academic institutions, eg the ANU, specialised facilities being opened by Federal Government Ministers, commissioned research] by Four Corners, etc.  There is material for a more in-depth article.  Aoziwe (talk) 14:54, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. North America1000 17:22, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. North America1000 17:23, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America1000 17:24, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. North America1000 17:24, 30 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete as WP:CORP itself, as mentioned above, actually says press releases, press kits, or similar works; any material written by the organization, its members, or sources closely associated with it; advertising and marketing materials by, about, or on behalf of the organization, any material written or published by the organization, directly or indirectly, any material where the company talks about itself therefore any sourcing with immediate resemblance can be discounted; WP:NOT also says that "articles about garage or local companies are typically unacceptable" therefore the 100 employee count can be counted as a local company. To analyze sources: 1 is company website, 2 and 3 are event listing, 4-10 are announcements therefore not independent. There's also clear unconfessed company connections here, 1 and 2 accounts. That alone is enough for our WP:Deletion policy and without exceptions even when considering the coverage found was only announcements or notices. No matter if it's 20 or 30 press releases, it wouldn't cut it. WP:N explicitly says that articles need to guaranteed they're not violating WP:What Wikipedia is not, before chances of an article are gauged. SwisterTwister   talk  18:21, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes the current in-article references are poor, but there are NEXIST others which are independent. The company is a nation wide company, not local.    Where is employee count referred to in any guideline, and even if it was it would only be a presumption not definitive.   Aoziwe (talk) 23:40, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:57, 7 August 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J 947(c) (m) 05:48, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete References fails WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. Most of the article is advertising - the list of "notable" projects reeks of promotion as does the list of awards most of which are unreferenced. -- HighKing ++ 18:46, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Wikipedia is not a sales prospectus, and that's what the article is. 100% advertorial content, which is excluded per WP:NOTSPAM. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:55, 18 August 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate]]. talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.