Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/22squared

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 16:59, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22squared

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

22squared (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

This is an extremely trivial, run of the mill advertish article about a company that seems to be just as run of the mill. Nothing in the few sources contained in it about them hiring people and winning an award help establish the companies notability at all and I couldn't find anything that would in a WP:BEFORE. So, the article is both a WP:GNG and WP:NCORP failure. Adamant1 (talk) 09:23, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CptViraj (talk) 09:45, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CptViraj (talk) 09:45, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete there is no significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. The kind of coverage that does exist is routine and trivial in trade magazines; two new clients, a new office, an announcement of a new executive-level hire, that kind of thing. Winning "Best Agency for Social" at the iMedia Agency Awards 2011 is not a distinction that confers notability either. Vexations (talk) 15:37, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:14, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Doesn’t meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines. There are sources, but not a plentiful amount. The coverage is also trivial as Vexations mentioned. — Coastaline (talk) 00:20, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• comment so many buying/splitting/absorptions and it's hard to see if any of it came from the original company but the Tucker Wayne has some signs of notability https://www.nytimes.com/1972/01/17/archives/tucker-wayne-looking-afield.html https://www.nytimes.com/1987/12/30/business/advertising-tucker-wayne-to-join-with-luckie-forney.html I'm incline towards delete under the current company. Graywalls (talk) 00:59, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion. I am unable to locate any significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content, references to date fail the criteria for establishing notability, topic therefore fails GNG/WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 12:16, 3 October 2020 (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.