Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashford.com

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 Keep. I would like to commend Joe Chill on the work he did on this AfD, which was conclusive. NAC—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 23:23, 27 October 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Ashford.com

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

Infamous online spammer; speedy deletion declined; no reliable sources can document the notability of the company or the website. Bearian (talk) 19:24, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Per [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], and [6]. Joe Chill (talk) 19:38, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and start over. The article should not be advertising ashford.com, it should be describing ashford.com. If they're an infamous spammer, as per the nom, that alone connotes some notability. That said, cite 6 that Joe Chill found is a good start. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 20:09, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Change !vote to keep per work done by Sedoya. Good job. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 20:58, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 13:55, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article has been updated to include Joe Chill's links From USA Today and Published Books. Any form of promotional language WP:NPOV has been removed and WP:NOTE guidelines have been met Seyoda (talk) 14:09, 21 October 2009 (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.