- 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. j⚛e decker talk 00:55, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Shipwire
- Shipwire ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non notable company, and promotional article. The refs, although some are in usually reliable places, seem to amount to well-placed slightly disguised PR. DGG ( talk ) 04:20, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. Passing mentions / PR instead of proper WP:RS; fails Wikipedia:Notability (companies). -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:31, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- Comment See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 79#SavvyMedia - probably paid editing. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 05:47, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- Delete per arguments of Piotrus and Oiyarbepsy. Sources connected to the subject count for nothing when trying to establish notability, and the indication of paid editing is disturbing. — Swpb talk 15:29, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica 1000 18:56, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica 1000 18:56, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica 1000 18:56, 17 November 2014 (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. j⚛e decker talk 00:55, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Shipwire
- Shipwire ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non notable company, and promotional article. The refs, although some are in usually reliable places, seem to amount to well-placed slightly disguised PR. DGG ( talk ) 04:20, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. Passing mentions / PR instead of proper WP:RS; fails Wikipedia:Notability (companies). -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:31, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- Comment See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 79#SavvyMedia - probably paid editing. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 05:47, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- Delete per arguments of Piotrus and Oiyarbepsy. Sources connected to the subject count for nothing when trying to establish notability, and the indication of paid editing is disturbing. — Swpb talk 15:29, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica 1000 18:56, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica 1000 18:56, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica 1000 18:56, 17 November 2014 (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.