Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alsbridge

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. postdlf (talk) 02:27, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alsbridge

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

Not notable and no substantive claims to notability. All refs are own press releases and one that makes no mention of Ashbridge. Reads like a puff piece. Fails WP:CORP. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 21:13, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning towards delete - I'm concerned by the enormous amount of original or republished press releases on Google News, two searches here and here although I did find a few decent Dallas Business Journal articles there and, through a different search, this. It seems the company hasn't received much attention from news sources these past few years but they are still active with one press release for 2013 here regarding an expansion. Google Books found results here (briefly mentions the company but the preview doesn't provide much), here (minor mention) and here (second result from the bottom, Consulting magazine mentions them as part of a "morale" list). A different search found this which is from a website that Alsbridge acquired, outsourcing-center.com and I also found this which talks about a new acquisition and what has happened since. At their website, they list three awards they have received, 2010, 2011 and 2012 from IAOP for "World's Best Outsourcing Advisors" but it seems they've never received news coverage for this as is the same with a few other awards I searched for. SwisterTwister talk 21:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Theopolisme (talk) 23:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 01:46, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete Any sources are self published as SwisterTwister said. Not notable and fails WP:CORP. Vacation9 02:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable. —Ed!^(talk) 03:27, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I came across this article Alsbridge, Inc. while going through the backlogs, which seems to be a duplication of this by the author. Can't seem to find any sources that confirm WP:COMPANY notability Funny ^Pika 20:28, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both Alsbridge and Alsbridge, Inc.. I can't find anything that supports the notability of this company. Both may also qualify for WP:CSD#G7 speedy deletion because the author of Alsbridge, Inc. is claiming to also be the editor that created Alsbridge and he is requesting deletion of that article. Peacock (talk) 21:22, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt. While an author's COI isn't reason enough to delete, it appears that this article has multiple authors with a COI. Seems like a pretty clear case of promotion via meatpuppetry. Given the number of editors involved, article should be salted to prevent re-creation by one them (already attempted in the case of Alsbridge, Inc) ~Amatulić (talk) 21:47, 15 January 2013 (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.