Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Randall Travel

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 Speedy Deleted as spam (CSD G11). cholmes75 ^{(chit chat)} 04:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Randall Travel[edit]

I had deleted this article via WP:PROD as an uncontested deletion. The author since contacted me stating that they object to the deletion, so I have undeleted the article and brought it to AfD. The subject of the article fails WP:CORP and, even if it didn't, the tone of the article is borderline advert language. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 14:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, fails WP:CORP criteria, advertisement. --Ter e nc e Ong _{(C | R)} 14:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Blatant ad for a non-notable company. yandman 14:50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per yandman MNewnham 17:11, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak and reluctant keep but de-POV mercilessly. "Travel Company of the Year 2005-2006" seems to assert some sort of notability, assuming this is some recognised national award and not "Travel Company Based In London W4 Whose Name Starts With 'Ma' Of The Year". Author needs to source that statement. Tonywalton | Talk 18:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's an award from the AITO (association of independent tour operators), a pay-to-join club of tour operators, one of them being...you guessed it. Not a hugely notable award, IMHO. yandman 19:03, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, doesn't seem to be in any way notable. Lankiveil 01:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Strong delete - advertising, pure and simple "Leading"? By what criteria? Pete Fenelon 01:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now, almost every paragraph of the article smelling very strongly of pork. Can be speedied per WP:SPEEDY#G11. Allow it to return if it comes back in an encyclopaedic form. Ohconfucius 03:45, 13 November 2006 (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.