Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/StyleWE
- 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 speedy deleted criterion G5 (sockpuppet creation) and salted. I have also deleted Draft:StyleWe. Anyone reviewing this should note that the content of these two pages as well as the previously deleted article were bit-for-bit identical. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:46, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
- StyleWE (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails to pass WP:COMPANY. Listed sources are almost all self-published blog posts. I see no reasons for inclusion. Malunrenta (talk) 14:07, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: The article was created by a possible sock[1]. Previous attempt was speedy died[2] under CSD G11 and A7. A draft already exists Draft:StyleWe which has not been submitted to AFC yet. Malunrenta (talk) 14:08, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:34, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:34, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:34, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:34, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
- Delete as corporate spam; Wikipedia is not a space for hosting investor prospectus materials. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:06, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.