- 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. Mz7 ( talk) 04:34, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
SE Ranking
- SE Ranking ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This is a non-notable business that does not meet notability criteria outlined in WP:CORP. Sources that mention the subject are mostly non-independent (press releases) or just standard business directory listings. Many of the references do not even mention SE Ranking. No significant coverage. Edgeweyes ( talk) 12:13, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:50, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:50, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 08:07, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 08:07, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Fails GNG and WP:SPIP, references fail WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. -- HighKing ++ 14:48, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete: Fails Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Independence of sources ("A primary test of notability is whether people independent of the subject itself (or its manufacturer, creator, or vendor) have actually considered the company, corporation, product or service notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial, non-routine works that focus upon it.") -- Guy Macon ( talk) 14:59, 22 August 2017 (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.
- 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. Mz7 ( talk) 04:34, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
SE Ranking
- SE Ranking ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This is a non-notable business that does not meet notability criteria outlined in WP:CORP. Sources that mention the subject are mostly non-independent (press releases) or just standard business directory listings. Many of the references do not even mention SE Ranking. No significant coverage. Edgeweyes ( talk) 12:13, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:50, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:50, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 08:07, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 08:07, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Fails GNG and WP:SPIP, references fail WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. -- HighKing ++ 14:48, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete: Fails Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Independence of sources ("A primary test of notability is whether people independent of the subject itself (or its manufacturer, creator, or vendor) have actually considered the company, corporation, product or service notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial, non-routine works that focus upon it.") -- Guy Macon ( talk) 14:59, 22 August 2017 (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.