Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dodo Services

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. --BDD (talk) 22:54, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dodo Services[edit]

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

Advertisement. I think it should be possible to have an article, but the only way to do it would be to start over; I am reluctant to benefit the writers of advertisements on WP by our rewriting their work into acceptable articles . I'm surprised this was accepted from afc contained phrases like " whilst benefiting from Dodo Mobile, STD and International discount rates. " or "Dodo Insurance offers a range of affordable car, home and contents insurance policies" or "giving Dodo customers a chance to win an exclusive money-can't-buy V8 Supercar experience " ; I've notified the acceptor. DGG ( talk ) 04:48, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 04:56, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 04:56, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Theopolisme (talk) 01:33, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Per nom is pure promotional, also some sections appear to be COPYVIO from other websites. Caffeyw (talk) 04:42, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Don't Delete / Edit - This article has been written in order to represent, outline and describe Dodo Services Pty Ltd as a business in Australia. We will revise the article in the meantime in order to remove advertisement-like phrases and increase neutrality. Jesseoey (talk) 15:35, 29 August 2013 (AEST)
Delete—Agree with DGG... there's more promotional in this article than there is encyclopedic. While the subject is potentially notable, the current article is a prime example of using WP to advertise and increase legitimacy, and a rewrite would have to be nearly from scratch. Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 20:38, 29 August 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.