Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Online mortgage advisor

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:08, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Online mortgage advisor[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)

The subject appears to fail WP:NCORP. The sourcing currently in the article includes just the company's website and a couple of listings in government databases (both of which show a company name that differs from the one given in the article, although I think that's just a matter of trading name versus registered name). I looked for better sourcing, the best I could find was a one-line mention in The Sun, and a couple of press releases in industry mags - nothing that came close to WP:CORPDEPTH. GirthSummit _(blether) 13:37, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. PATH SLOPU 13:49, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. PATH SLOPU 13:49, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. PATH SLOPU 13:49, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Article reads more like a promotional piece than anything.TH1980 (talk) 02:48, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

~~*comment~~ I'm not familiar with UK companies, so I can't really weigh in on how much of a household name it is over there, there are fairly recent coverage
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/money/2687537/couple-refused-mortgage-bad-credit-buy-two-bed-house-how-to-do-it/
https://www.financialreporter.co.uk/finance-news/bluestone-announce-new-partnership-with-online-mortgage-advisor.html
https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/property/833717/house-prices-property-comparison-tool
I'll leave it up to people familiar with the UK. Graywalls (talk) 17:29, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Never heard of it. CoolSkittle (talk) 21:52, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:45, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I don't believe this is notable, the references certainly get nowhere near satisfying NCORP, but even if it was, the article is irretrievably SPAMmy and should be deleted as a WP:TNT case if nothing else. SpinningSpark 21:29, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as not notable spam crud. CoolSkittle (talk) 21:54, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Quick review of the sources identified above - The Financial Reporter piece is a rehashed press release with a brief interview with the managing director - this isn't independent of the subject; the Scottish Sun gives it a one line passing mention - not significant coverage (plus it's the Sun, which is not really RS); I'm not so sure about the Express article - it's longer than the FR one, but still looks pretty puffy as if it was based on a press release, with another short interview with the MD, so may not be properly independent. There's also the problem that it's the Express - probably ranks lower than the Sun in terms of reliability. In short, I don't believe that any of these rise to the level of WP:CORPDEPTH. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:19, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete given the explanation provided in response. Graywalls (talk) 19:41, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Does not meet notability criteria, poorly referenced. Spyder212 (talk) 19:15, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Besides not being an appropriate title for the company (it sounds like a general article about mortgage advisors on the internet), the company falls short of WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. The sources mentioned above aren't independent sigcov and I also found these other sources that are similarly passing mentions or not independent: a profile from The Guardian, an advertisement-like first-person article, and a TruVest article. I also found a Gorkana News article, but this company still falls short of the aforementioned notability guidelines even with this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkH21 (talk • contribs) 06:45, 26 April 2019 (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.