Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hire Association Europe (2nd nomination)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus. In light of the previous AfD, there is not a strong enough consensus to delete. – Joe (talk) 16:57, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hire Association Europe[edit]

Hire Association Europe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I believe this fails WP:CORP. The previous AFD back in 2013 suggested possible avenues of notability, but my follow-up is not finding anything concrete that could be used to pass the notability guidelines. All I could find are press releases, incidental mentions, and an awards show. If sources exist I’d be happy to clean up the article, but I don’t want to waste time on a lost cause so I’m bringing it back here first. ZettaComposer (talk) 12:56, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 14:50, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 14:50, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, !dave 14:28, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 13:37, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • weak keep I too find a lot of incidental mentions, though I did find a few that could contribute to some narrative about the organization. The problem, it appears, is that any significant info about its structure and history in the large is going to have to come from the organization itself. Mangoe (talk) 15:42, 2 January 2018 (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.