Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amonetize

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:16, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Amonetize

Amonetize (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Logged in to nominate for deletion; there are no significant sources that show this entity as notable. Nowhere near passing GNG. Searches for sources that could improve the article have come up empty, only passing mentions at best or PR-originating fluff pieces. Geolocalipuma (talk) 20:09, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly
  Talk to my owner:Online 20:24, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Note: This debate has been included in the

talk) 00:11, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the

talk) 00:11, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

• Delete,
  WP:DEL6 with WP:IAR  I looked at the article and the McAfee reference.  I do not see a NPOV in this article, and there are no inline citations that allow me to verify the viewpoints given.  I added WP:IAR because of the WP:DEL6 requirement to prove that the article "cannot possibly" be sourced, as I have no way of proving that sourcing is not possible.  Unscintillating (talk) 00:54, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
  ]

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.