Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ResDiary

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) 00:25, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ResDiary

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

Fails

WP:CORPDEPTH Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:32, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:31, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:31, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:31, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The
Herald Scotland citations are all reliable sources providing significant coverage. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:41, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Both the
WP:TOOSOON at best ,the company size and turnover is not signficant .This is a paid article to promote the company.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 22:20, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:09, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the

talk) 14:00, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete Fails GNG and
-- HighKing⁺⁺ 15:26, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete Fails
WP:CORPDEPTH as no significant sourcing has been established. Per Pharaoh, interviews with a member of the company or information from user-generated websites does not qualify as adequate sources for establishing notability.--SamHolt6 (talk) 15:56, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete as the ideal policies we use here are WP:What Wikipedia is not and WP:Not advocacy at all costs, and above anything else; should there be chances of an article, saving unacceptable certainly isn't the solution. SwisterTwister talk 04:19, 16 October 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.