Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reprise Digital

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 delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:53, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reprise Digital (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reprise Digital

Non-notable marketing agency that does not satisfy general notability or corporate notability. The body of the article says nothing about significant coverage by third parties. The one reference is a press release about its management and so is not an independent source. The agency is a subsidiary of a subsidiary of The Interpublic Group of Companies, and a redirect to the parent company is a sufficient alternative to deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:26, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Universal McCann and Initiative (agency) are also subsidiaries of a subsidiary of The Interpublic Group of Companies and so that shouldn't be a justification for deletion. Raghavkvp (talk) 05:45, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete non-notable and created by a sockpuppet account
Lindsey40186 (talk) 16:05, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete per nom, non notable company. My search didn't find anything that clearly satisfies WP:GNG. BrutBrother (talk) 08:42, 23 June 2022 (UTC) striking confirmed blocked sockpuppet, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:00, 23 June 2022 (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.