Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Psfk

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. W.marsh 15:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Psfk[edit]

apparent non-notable company, supporting links are insufficient or non-functioning; previously deleted under {{db-spam}} - CobaltBlueTony 17:50, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep but remove advertising language. It's a trendspotting blog, apparently. I found lots of assorted blog links, but also a few things that might qualify as reliable sources: Columbia News Service, Trendhunter magazine. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:02, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:SPAM. --Gavin Collins 22:04, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per GavinCollins. Bearian 15:34, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There's enough reliable source material contained in the following: (1) March 7, 2005 AdWeek, (2) October 1, 2005 Fast Company, (3) December 13, 2005 Denver Post, (4) May 15, 2006 Boston Globe, (5) July 31, 2006 Advertising Age, (6) October 2, 2006 Boston Globe, (7) January 8, 2007 Boston Globe, (8) January 29, 2007 Boston Globe, (9) April 16, 2007 Brand Strategy, (10) April 30, 2007 Boston Globe, (11) May 21, 2007 Boston Globe, (12) June 18, 2007 Boston Globe, (13) June 25, 2007 Boston Globe, (14) July 9, 2007 Brand Strategy, (15) July 30, 2007 Boston Globe, (16) August 20, 2007 Boston Globe. Also, there are two press releases that might contain some usable information: (17) May 29, 2003 PR, (18) June 14, 2007 PR. -- Jreferee t/c 18:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, W.marsh 18:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless reliable sources can be found. None of the above links are about the website. DCEdwards1966 19:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The above links are provided by Psfk, rather than being about Psfk. Such links are not considered to be sources. This company fails both WP:ORG and WP:WEB. The article makes no attempt to assert the notability of the company, merely making the reader aware the company exists. Quote from WP:WEB: "Wikipedians are averse to the use of Wikipedia for advertising, and Wikipedia articles are not advertisements is an official policy of long standing." SilkTork *SilkyTalk 22:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletions. -- Gavin Collins 00:18, 21 October 2007 (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.