Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RiskAdvisor

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:11, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RiskAdvisor[edit]

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

No claim to notability. Esprit15d • talk • contribs 01:27, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 06:57, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 06:57, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: A WP:SPA article on a firm and its platform proposition. The article text does not indicate notability as a firm (10 employees) or a platform (500 registered users). Setting aside similarly named firms elsewhere, I am not seeing evidence of attained notability, whether as a company or a product. AllyD (talk) 06:57, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Little in the way of coverage to substantiate notability. -- Whats new?^(talk) 23:09, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
delete blatant advert created by a single purpose editor. LibStar (talk) 02:05, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. Pure WP:PROMO. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 16:27, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Agree with above reasoning. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:23, 4 May 2017 (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.