Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CleanEquity (2nd nomination)

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:03, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CleanEquity[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Promotional page, written like a press release. No evidence of notability in article; sourced only to itself. WP:BEFORE shows no external evidence of notability. Has not improved in nine years, and has no prospects of improvement. Was created and AFDed in 2008 as well. David Gerard (talk) 22:12, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 22:12, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 22:12, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 22:12, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Organization does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NCORP. Orville1974 (talk) 22:17, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. 94rain ^Talk 02:26, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - only serves as a means of advertising, no evidence of notability. Can't find any significant coverage by reliable sources to suggest that it warrants an article. --DannyS712 (talk) 10:20, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Very much a WP:PROMOTIONAL page. No WP:INDEPENDENT sources. A BEFORE spot check (newspapers.com, Google News, Google Books, JSTOR) by me fails to find WP:SIGCOV not contained in the page. Fails GNG. Chetsford (talk) 01:26, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Highly promotional. Doesn't have WP:SIGCOV in multiple secondary reliable sources. Fails WP:NORG. We should speedy delete it since it was deleted by an afd discussion. Masum Reza^📞 21:53, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- I was highly tempted, except that it's been around for nine years since ... - David Gerard (talk) 22:05, 29 June 2019 (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.