This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Advertising. It is one of many
deletion lists coordinated by
WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at
WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at
WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Advertising|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by
a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (
prod,
CfD,
TfD etc.) related to Advertising. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's
deletion policy and
WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
The subject of this article is a business with no proven notability. As written, it contains no references. A limited web search reveals no feature stories or in-depth articles that would indicate that this organization should be included in an encyclopedia. A single story in Daily Variety [
[1]] from 2006 was all I could unearth
I had previously submitted it for PROD but the reviewer somehow felt this was worth keeping.
Volcom95 (
talk) 06:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment The Sacks and Co. article currently lacks sufficient reliable sources to establish notability, raising concerns about its verifiability and relevance. However, instead of deletion, efforts could be made to improve the article by adding credible references and enhancing its content.--
Welcome to Pandora (
talk) 08:19, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I have undertaken such an effort to improve and, as noted, only a single credible reference could be found.
Volcom95 (
talk) 17:23, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 06:47, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. Article was created in 2008 by an SPI, indeed that was their only edit. Per the above, only one source could be found, so subject is not notable.
Chiswick Chap (
talk) 10:15, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 00:44, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Advertising. It is one of many
deletion lists coordinated by
WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at
WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at
WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Advertising|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by
a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (
prod,
CfD,
TfD etc.) related to Advertising. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's
deletion policy and
WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
The subject of this article is a business with no proven notability. As written, it contains no references. A limited web search reveals no feature stories or in-depth articles that would indicate that this organization should be included in an encyclopedia. A single story in Daily Variety [
[1]] from 2006 was all I could unearth
I had previously submitted it for PROD but the reviewer somehow felt this was worth keeping.
Volcom95 (
talk) 06:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment The Sacks and Co. article currently lacks sufficient reliable sources to establish notability, raising concerns about its verifiability and relevance. However, instead of deletion, efforts could be made to improve the article by adding credible references and enhancing its content.--
Welcome to Pandora (
talk) 08:19, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I have undertaken such an effort to improve and, as noted, only a single credible reference could be found.
Volcom95 (
talk) 17:23, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 06:47, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. Article was created in 2008 by an SPI, indeed that was their only edit. Per the above, only one source could be found, so subject is not notable.
Chiswick Chap (
talk) 10:15, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 00:44, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply