Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abraxas Lifestyle

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:22, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Abraxas Lifestyle

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

Puffy article about a magazine that fails independent coverage per WP:GNG. Nothing on GBooks, a couple of passing mentions on GNews. The sources mentioned in the article are either directly self-published, submitted to other parties by the subject itself (e.g. compare http://luxurylifestyleawards.com/en/news/515.html?contentonly=1 with http://abraxaslifestyle.com/about-us), or merely passing mentions. The page was speedied before as being an advert. HyperGaruda (talk) 09:09, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. HyperGaruda (talk) 09:15, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. HyperGaruda (talk) 09:15, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. HyperGaruda (talk) 09:15, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and salt Wiki wants to be an encyclopedia. This belongs at a press agency. Anmccaff (talk) 01:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malcolmxl5 (talk) 06:50, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:14, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:26, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - there is not enough coverage by WP:RS to make this one stick. A search results in passing mentions about collaborations with other corporations which actually contravenes - notability cannot be inherited. Maharayamui (talk) 08:01, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as still questionable for the applicable notability. SwisterTwister talk 07:22, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as i see no signs of notability. Lakun.patra (talk) 16:18, 2 April 2016 (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.