Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imprima

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. sufficient consensus DGG ( talk ) 14:00, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Imprima

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

My searches noticeably found simply found nothing at all and that's not surprising because, even if it's from 100 years ago, it was apparently only relaunched 15 years ago; my searches including archived news have found nothing. SwisterTwister talk 02:46, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 02:47, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 02:47, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:14, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:14, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I've done some searches and not turning up anything either. The sources cited all seem to be corporate public releases. RA0808 ^talk _contribs 19:54, 14 July 2016 (UTC); edited 19:56, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Music1201 ^talk 01:45, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yellow Dingo (talk) 06:54, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- promo content and a non-notable company. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:56, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Admin comment: @DGG: You just deleted this AfD page with the reason "sufficient consensus after relistings". I've restored it because I assume you meant to close the discussion as delete, right? (See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jo Street; are there any others?) Sandstein 07:14, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - FWIW, I notified DGG as it is and there are no other AfDs, no, I only noticed these two. SwisterTwister talk 07:26, 6 August 2016 (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.