The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 05:37, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Non-notable guide / award, fails WP:Notability. The only secondary coverage are press releases by the winning brands that of course say that it's a very prestigious award that they completely deserve, but these don't appear to be significant press releases or serious focuses of advertising; just standard daily churnalism. ( This article from The Statesman is about as good as it gets, just copy-pastes a description of the methodology from the website, and is basically a thinly disguised advertisement to buy that year's guide. Other sources are even thinner.) There are essentially no non-primary sources that have significant coverage that dispassionately describe the award itself, the process, the company, whether winning the award is useful for advertising, etc. and a WP:BEFORE Google search has not turned up any unused sources. It is unlikely there are sources in other languages either - the yearly guide is published only in English, so I don't think untapped Hindi/Urdu/Bengali/etc. language coverage exists. There are a few passing mentions of the award in a few books - but we're not talking very prestigious books, rather random books of unclear sales/relevance from a Google Books search - but again no secondary coverage ( [1], [2]) both merely cite the report on a single page, but don't describe it.) Doesn't seem close to satisfying WP:THREE even if you think that "The Statesmen" article (the closest to being a real article) counts as coverage. SnowFire ( talk) 01:04, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
01:40, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
04:07, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 05:37, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Non-notable guide / award, fails WP:Notability. The only secondary coverage are press releases by the winning brands that of course say that it's a very prestigious award that they completely deserve, but these don't appear to be significant press releases or serious focuses of advertising; just standard daily churnalism. ( This article from The Statesman is about as good as it gets, just copy-pastes a description of the methodology from the website, and is basically a thinly disguised advertisement to buy that year's guide. Other sources are even thinner.) There are essentially no non-primary sources that have significant coverage that dispassionately describe the award itself, the process, the company, whether winning the award is useful for advertising, etc. and a WP:BEFORE Google search has not turned up any unused sources. It is unlikely there are sources in other languages either - the yearly guide is published only in English, so I don't think untapped Hindi/Urdu/Bengali/etc. language coverage exists. There are a few passing mentions of the award in a few books - but we're not talking very prestigious books, rather random books of unclear sales/relevance from a Google Books search - but again no secondary coverage ( [1], [2]) both merely cite the report on a single page, but don't describe it.) Doesn't seem close to satisfying WP:THREE even if you think that "The Statesmen" article (the closest to being a real article) counts as coverage. SnowFire ( talk) 01:04, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
01:40, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
04:07, 9 September 2022 (UTC)