Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greenfinder

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:19, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greenfinder[edit]

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

Non-notable company/website. No reliable third party references given. Everything points to this being a one-man-band and not something notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia Biker Biker (talk) 12:00, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The "sources" are the company's website, an article that doesn't mention the company, and a business directory listing. Fails to establish notability.Tigerboy1966 (talk) 12:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I had a look too for sources and couldn't find anything. The author has put some time into writing a decent article but without if no sources of notability can be found, it shouldn't be here. Heywoodg 12:59, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do not delete I have found three third-party sources relating to Greenfinder and there will be more. TheHungryCapitalist (talk) 00:17, 30 September 2011 (AEST)

Franchise Business, AussieWeb, EcoExpo, Organic Expo and PRWeb are all credible secondary sources that refer to Greenfinder. Please do not delete this article. TheHungryCapitalist (talk) 00:33, 30 September 2011 (AEST)

PRWeb will print any company's press release. That doesn't establish notability only that the company exists - and WP:ITEXISTS shows that is not a valid argument to keep an article. Similarly Franchise Business and AussieWeb are just listings sites like Greenfinder itself which again show that the site exists, but do not establish notability. What is needed is reliable third party sources - detailed press articles, for example, talking about the site and the contribution it is making to the green / eco movement in Australia. Even the "Sites we like" link, which is a good reference, is far from enough to establish notability. --Biker Biker (talk) 14:57, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The ecoexpo and organicexpo refs 4 & 5 seem to be the same webpage. Again, it's just listing. And there would be no point including more sites who have published the greenfinder press release (I found a couple on google quite easily) More of the same is not going to save this. Quality not quantity needed. Good luck (genuinely)Tigerboy1966 (talk) 19:37, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. — — alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:06, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — — alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:06, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. — — alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:06, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 23:22, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Completely and utterly non-notable company with only it's own website as the only source. Article reads like an advertisement in some sense. --NINTENDUDE ⁶⁴ 23:36, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that there are not sufficient notable resources on the page but I fail to see how it is an advertisement. TheHungryCapitalist (talk) 11:39, 30 September 2011 (AEST)

Delete - There is very litle I can add to the rationale by Tigerboy1966. It's not an advert but clearly reads like a promotional piece or press release material for directory site inclusion. There are no independent, dedicated articles in the established press that indicate that this company has significantly contributed to society or Australia's economy or ecology. Fails to meet criteria at WP:ORG. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:16, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per just about everybody above: another Internet business directory that advertises companies and products that are environmentally friendly.... - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:39, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete clear advert that fails WP:CORP due to lack of reliable sources. LibStar (talk) 13:33, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:GNG. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:03, 5 October 2011 (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.