Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ExPlus

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. --BDD (talk) 23:51, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ExPlus

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

Author declined PROD whose reason for deletion was that the article "lacks amy proof of notability. However, it also seems to be a spam, since articles on this company are created on Chinese, English and Russian sections of Wikipedia within several days; articles here and at Chinese WP are both authored by user Explus.tw, and while on RuWP it was created unregistered (as IP-user), Russian words below definitely meam the same person in all 3 cases." Peridon (talk) 14:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The Russian reference looks like a directory entry, as does the Taiwan Industry one. Peridon (talk) 14:12, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Update about Russian interwiki Actually in Russian Wikipedia it was already posted trice - twice as ExPlus (at least one of them under the same Explus.tw username), both speedy deleted, then as Explus (nominated for deletion and is very likely to be deleted again). Tatewaki (talk) 15:03, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Also, the explanation by author on his user talk page about the link with Russian words is a lie: Even just this one line "Изготовление печатных плат и контрактное производство под ключ в Тайване" is clear "short ad" for any Russian speaker (the term "под ключ" /lit. under the key/ in Russian is used in ads or contracts and always refers to "ready-made" production, repair or small business organizing, "just unlock/open and you can use it/live/work here"). The given link leads to article about history of circuit boards (with year 1948 as latest date) NOT mentioning or recommending ExPlus, with several short commercial ads above it - two on circuit boards, one on "applying grease to any surfaces" and one on "repairing apartments, cottages and offices" with minimum price per square meter. Tatewaki (talk) 15:43, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No evidence of meeting notability guidelines - Wikipedia is not a trade directory. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt. Helped this editor earlier, but the Russian source is nonsense. More importantly, in Taiwan, although 耀騰股份有限公司 gets directory entries, no sign yet of a trade magazine article. I would expect the creator to be able to source a Taiwanese trade magazine or giving a short story about any moderately notable company. I get the feeling that the article creator is the Russian importer and not him/herself in Taiwan, in which case articles could perhaps be found. But until such time, delete. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:24, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Considering barely understandable language in version in Russian Wikipedia (already deleted 3rd time, as spam), it's not "Russian importer" but "Taiwanese section for export to Russia", even Russian version of their website is more legible. I have tried myself to check for sources at their site (even moderate companies sometimes have "Media about us" section) or in GoogleBooks, however the former is all advertisement with exclamation points here and there, and the latter gives only ad/selling sections of electronics magazines (sometimes even in respectable magazines however all these sections of "Board ExPlus AAAA - $XXX, Board ExPlus BBB - $YYY" still remain just an ad) Tatewaki (talk) 14:10, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Taiwan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:28, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:28, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:29, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per Andy. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:38, 19 September 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.