Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ENFOS, Inc.

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. – Juliancolton | Talk 00:27, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ENFOS, Inc.[edit]

ENFOS, Inc. (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)

Clear advertising in which WP:NOT applies since it's clear this is only existing for their own PR advertising gains and not an actual encyclopedia article, the sources show this since it's simply their firsthand published and republished advertising and the history itself shows nothing has changed at all; also before anyone suggests citing published and republished company advertising, searches found absolutely nothing. SwisterTwister talk 17:20, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 08:45, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- this content belongs on the company web site, not here. This is a WP:PROMO page on an unremarkable business. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:45, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America1000 13:21, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America1000 13:21, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:33, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete any article that mentions "solutions" that many times and has nothing to do with solutions, reeks of marketing. W Nowicki (talk) 23:01, 19 December 2016 (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.