Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murmur Creative

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. MBisanz ^talk 00:36, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Murmur Creative

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

Article about small company without an indication of its notability. Slashme (talk) 20:35, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Creative agencies are an important part of the business-fabric of our cities. I wish it were easier to find information about them on Wikipedia, but sadly they get deleted before being given a chance. Hopefully this listing will be given a chance to mature and offer useful information. Ideally, I would love to see a list of all creative agencies in a town or city then linked to their respective pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nerves76 (talk • contribs)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. New Media Theorist (talk) 21:01, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete News and Highbeam returned a couple of minor mentions. Nothing substantial in any of the searches. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:09, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Very non-notable company, although the local bake shop is a client. No significant refs. New Media Theorist (talk) 01:28, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Promotional article about a non-notable company. Creator has an undisclosed conflict of interest regarding this subject. MER-C 04:17, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:22, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:22, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:22, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per @MER-C: promo article about a non-notable company. Quis separabit? 19:42, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now as there simply appears to be no better coverage. SwisterTwister talk 21:47, 13 September 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.