Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Finance


 * 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. j⚛e deckertalk 14:19, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

World Finance
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No coverage in independent reliable sources. Press releases don't count.  D r e a m Focus  19:52, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:02, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:02, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

— JBhome (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. 
 * Delete. As nominator says, no coverage in independent reliable sources. Magazine/website appears to exist primarily to source a flurry of press releases and marketing material for its "awards" etc. Article cites articles written by Nouriel Roubini and Robert Shiller, but these were both the product of syndicate service Project Syndicate--if my local pennysaver runs syndicated articles by Oprah and Ellen, their notability does not confer notability on the pennysaver, either. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 00:55, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. This Wikipedia article had existed without issue for several years until a user incorrectly attributed a fact to the brand which required changing. At the time updates were made we were unaware that press releases were not considered reliable sources. This is a magazine with a wide distribution with plenty of original content as well as some syndicated articles as a www.worldfinance.com will demonstrate and we are in the process of sourcing other links to our work--JBhome (talk) 16:52, 13 June 2014 (GMT)
 * JBhome, you work for them, so you can't really vote in an AFD. This article has been created and edited by people working for them, which is also in a violation of Wikipedia rules.  If you can find what Wikipedia considers Reliable Sources, then post them here.   D r e a m Focus  20:11, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment -- This has far too much the feel of an ADVERT. I am not clear if the magazine is notable, but it might be.  I am accoringly not voting.  We certainly seem to have WP:COI and a complete lack of independent WP:RS.  Peterkingiron (talk) 11:47, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 01:24, 17 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - Lots of press exists about companies that have received awards from the magazine, but not finding significant coverage in reliable sources about the magazine itself. So far, I've only found this source which includes some brief information about the magazine, but this isn't enough to qualify an article due to 1) the lack of depth in coverage and 2) because topics require coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to qualify topic notability. NorthAmerica1000 01:45, 17 June 2014 (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.