Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IBRIT

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. Sandstein 06:01, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

IBRIT[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)

Non-notable company, fails WP:CORPDEPTH. Possibly undisclosed native advertising, given the contribution history of the creator. MER-C 14:50, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 14:59, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 14:59, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: An article describing a recent new company's products and distribution arrangements. The provided sources fall under routine announcements and product listings/reviews; other coverage describes it as "a relatively unknown new brand, but it has made significant progress in the UAE in a short period of time" ([1] (May 2018 report) – via HighBeam (subscription required) ): none of this is sufficient to meet the WP:CORPDEPTH criteria. AllyD (talk) 08:56, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no indications of significance, no real claim to notability, and lacking the quality sourcing to pass WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Passing mentions will not cut it.--SamHolt6 (talk) 15:42, 22 June 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.