Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Motive Interactive (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. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Motive Interactive[edit]

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

Only sources are blogs and a website that has a blatant disclaimer saying it is a "paid review." Article came up in my patrols for articles listing "Network Products Guide" which is a pay-for-play award. CorporateM (Talk) 20:01, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Still does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NCORP, any more than it did when it was last up for AfD. --bonadea contributions talk 20:11, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ as the business has won a notable award. ^King Jakob _C2 21:10, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't accept that any award for the fastest growing business (or fastest growing anything else) can confer notability. Any business that grows from nothing to something in a particular period has an infinite growth rate. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:59, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am changing to Weak keep per the low number of google news results, although I'm still hanging onto the possibility that notability can be established with this. @Phil Bridger: Notable is still notable, they have won a award with a blue link. ^King Jakob _C2 18:19, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: if the award was notable enough, there'd be some reliable sources about it p b p 22:46, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:07, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:07, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:07, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:08, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No significant coverage in independent reliable sources. The sourcing in the article consists primarily of blogs and press release. My own search turns up more blogs and press releases only. -- Whpq (talk) 16:33, 15 July 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.