Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Effortel

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. ✗plicit 12:55, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Effortel[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:NCORP. scope_creep^Talk 08:05, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Appears to have been a poorly sourced, promotional piece since its creation in 2010. No evidence that the company is notable. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 08:07, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Belgium. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:55, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per WP:RUNOFTHEMILL there doesn't seem to be any indication that this is more than just a regular non-notable company. Darron4 (talk) 10:46, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I agree with Darron4 and 2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 above. This article's only citations are internal, no evidence of it being noteworthy, an most substantive editing has been done by someone with a COI. RFZYNSPY ^talk 18:37, 16 August 2023 (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.