Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Onads Communications

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. Consensus is for deletion. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:37, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Onads Communications

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

An advertorially toned page on an unremarkable marketing agency. Significant RS coverage not found. Sources that come up consist of interviews & other non-independent coverage. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:48, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:48, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:48, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:49, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: An article which does no more than list the contracts of an agency going about its business, sourced to business listings and copies of the same routine contract announcements. Enough to verify the run-of-the-mill basics, but no evidence of encyclopaedic notability provided or found. AllyD (talk) 07:09, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete and Salt Absolute marketing skit. More advertising. When is it going to end. scope_creep (talk) 00:04, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and GNG. I deleted the entirity of the "Business" section as it was unencyclopedic. I would encourage other editors to also edit articles and remove "marketing skit" even if they subsequently !vote. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 13:31, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Lack of WP:CORPDEPTH with no sourcing to show a pass at WP:GNG. TheMagikCow (T) (C) 17:00, 20 May 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.