Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TalentPool

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) 19:53, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

TalentPool

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

inadequate evidence for notability. The " Guardian Small Business Network." is not the Guardian. The Real Business "article" is a promotional interview where the co-founders simply say why they think their ideas are so important, and the rest are trivial notices, including two very minor awards--and one not even an award, but shortlisted. DGG ( talk ) 02:24, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 02:30, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 02:30, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 02:31, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Corporate puffery. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:39, 5 December 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Delete - concur with nominator, sources are not independent of subject, non-notable company 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:57, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete "TalentPool" indeed. Even from the name you can infer a lot about this non notable website using Wikipedia to promote their business and cause. No sufficient sources to meet WP:GNG neither WP:NWEB. Both in the article and from search. –Ammarpad (talk) 07:55, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - WP:ROUTINE does not meet WP:CORPDEPTH. Other sources are not WP:RELIABLE. ~Kvng (talk) 04:22, 11 December 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.