Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/O'Connor Communications

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. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:51, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

O'Connor Communications[edit]

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

Promotional article tagged for notability since more than a year ago. Citations used are not reliable or do not actually contain much information on the company. A quick search at the leading trade magazine, PRWeek, confirms user:Peter James' comment on the Talk page; the founder may have a shot at notability, but the company does not. A discussion for another day. CorporateM (Talk) 16:02, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:53, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:53, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete due to WP:NOTINHERITED. While the founders' book is notable, their business is clearly not even close to being notable per WP:CORPDEPTH; I don't see any significant analysis of the company in reliable sources. The cites given are to blogs, press releases, a social media site, conference reports (possibly self-reported biographies), and the the company's website. Bearian (talk) 19:59, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per Bearian. The subject's business venture is not notable. A large portion of the article is about the founders, while another large section provides a laundry list of clients without any analysis. I eat BC Fish (talk) 04:55, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:39, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:01, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete I don't see independent coverage of this company so it doesn't meet the coverage requirements of WP:GNG.75.150.214.113 (talk) 18:30, 2 January 2015 (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.