Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bates Communications

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 redirect to Suzanne Bates. MBisanz ^talk 00:02, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bates Communications[edit]

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

No references. Does not appear to meet WP:CORP. Search on Google News shows only passing mentions. Darylgolden^(talk) Ping when replying 08:01, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:11, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:11, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note simultaneous AFD for Suzanne Bates.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:11, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Basically having two pages, one for Suzanne Bates, and one for her consulting firm, seems overkill, an advertisement, such that the "content" on this one is essentially a nonnotable client list. Her firm, as a separate firm not tied to Bates, doesn't get much coverage, so basically it looks like it is the sole-person, Bates, which is notable (maybe there's an office staff too but she's the prime consultant). Just not much new to say about this subject other than the principal is SB, so maybe best approach is to keep the SB article, and for this one, how about a Redirect to Suzanne Bates.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:16, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:56, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to Suzanne Bates, whose article has now been kept at AFD, and who appears to be by far the most important source of whatever notability this company might have. I note in passing the potential confusion between this company's name and assorted name variants used for the famous ad agency Ted Bates (advertising firm).--Arxiloxos (talk) 19:13, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Appears to be a violation of WP:ORGVANITY. A glance at the company's own In the News section[1] seems to suggest most of the press coverage is on the person and not the company. CorporateM (Talk) 01:49, 27 April 2015 (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.