Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dillon International

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. Based on general discussion and appraisal of sources it appears the subject fails NCORP. Ad Orientem (talk) 04:31, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dillon International[edit]

Dillon International (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An advertortorially-toned page on an unremarkable adoption agency. Does not meet WP:NORG; significant RS coverage not found. What comes up is passing mentions and / or WP:SPIP. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:50, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oklahoma-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:01, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:01, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kpgjhpjm 08:36, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kpgjhpjm 02:08, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I found a few sources, but nothing that is both significant coverage and a reliable source. Fails WP:NCORP.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 02:52, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Matt14451 (talk) 14:49, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete fails NCORP with significant coverage in RS. L293D ( • ) 13:10, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Seems notable to me as one of the two foreign agencies to have the approval of the Vietnamese government for the adoption of children - [1][2][3]. There is coverage of the organisation all over the world - [4][5][6]. The article needs rewriting, but that's a different issue. Hzh (talk)
    • Note to closing admin The bulk of the above linked sources are not in English so they may need to be checked by someone with the appropriate language skills or a good translator service in order to determine if they meet the standard for the new and improved NCORP. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:45, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nom's comment about sources. They are accessible via Google translate, and are routine news item, passing mentions, and / or rewarmed press releases (WP:SPIP). For example:
  • The Korean National Association of Korean Music (Texas) branch participated in a Korean adoptee camp organized by Dillon International held in Tulsa, Oklahoma, from Thursday 26th to 28th. [7]
  • On September 16, 2014, the Ministry of Justice awarded operation licenses to two US organizations, Dillon International and Holt International Children's Services, to operate in the field of foreign adoption in Vietnam after the adoption agreement. interrupted 2008. Nguyen Van Trong, in charge of the Dillon Internationnal office, was delighted at the opportunity to smile again with the little girl. [8]
  • Under the new agreement, there will be only two adoption agencies — Dillon International Inc. and Holt International Children’s Services Inc. — licensed to operate in Vietnam. (the only mention in the piece) [9], in English.
Etc. None of this meets WP:NCORP. Wikipedia is not a free means of promotion, nor a replacement for a corporate website. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:09, 14 October 2018 (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.