Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tubi Style

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. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 11:13, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tubi Style[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)

Doesn't seem to meet WP:NCORP. Completely promotional, zero references. Mikeblas (talk) 18:05, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:28, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:28, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. @Mikeblas: I found several references at this Google News search and added some of them to the article. Google search allows a user to focus the search on news or books, for example, and a nominator should search each of those options as part of WP:BEFORE when they are considering nominating an article for deletion. I think that notability is now demonstrated. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 10:28, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that WP:N requires significant coverage. While you've added a few references, they're to articles that make ancillary descriptions. A review was done of a car that had equipment made by this company, for example, but does not describe this company. One reference simply happens to mention the president of the company. Anohter just mentions the company in the title, nothing further. Despite your edits, notability is not established because these references are superfluous and not significant -- not even direct, really. -- Mikeblas (talk) 03:19, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of deep or significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. None of the references in the article meet the criteria including those added by Eastmain which all fail WP:CORPDEPTH and having searched I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria. Topic fails WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 12:57, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per HighKing.4meter4 (talk) 22:43, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per HighKing and fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:02, 25 September 2021 (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.