Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cody Images

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:13, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cody Images

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

This company sells stock and historical photograph. But their website only lists 200 images, and the rest is loren ipsum filler text. This is not indicative of a notable company. Senator2029 “Talk” 15:44, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:31, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:31, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:31, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: as corporate promotionalism. Quis separabit? 19:50, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as my searches have found nothing better and the article has nothing else outstanding to suggest the needed solid independent notability. SwisterTwister talk 22:08, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as there is nothing to indicate that it passes WP:COMPANY or WP:GNG. In addition to the company's website in the article, there is a Cody images blog, which looks like it was last updated in 2010. I couldn't find any coverage in reliable sources. Drchriswilliams (talk) 09:24, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Pernom. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 12:02, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No significant coverage in independent, reliable sources Mduvekot (talk) 19:08, 9 June 2016 (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.