Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elixirr

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. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:46, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Elixirr

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

Apparently non-notable consultancy, fails WP:CORP. Article apparently created and maintained by people associated with the company, consists almost exclusively of a list of mostly non-notable awards. I've been unable to find any in-depth coverage, though there are a number of passing mentions, and a good number of press releases hosted on Consultancy.uk and RealWire. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:59, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unless properly sourced, this deserves to be deleted. The only section with references doesn't tell much about the subject's background. Alexius08 (talk) 13:02, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - COI-created award spamming (most of them of questionable notability and independence) instead of sourced encyclopedic coverage about the company's real activities and history. Some PR activity via Google, but no independent reliable sources found. GermanJoe (talk) 14:16, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 00:01, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 00:01, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 00:01, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all, i've suggested edits in the Elixirr Talk page which I think address the lack of external notable references. As well I can see the company has been referenced in several large and genuine publications - including The Guardian, The Independent, Retail Weekly, Fresh Business Thinking and Startups HSVD (talk) 15:49, 15 October 2015 (UTC)HSVD[reply]

This list contains articles or interviews from Mr. Newton about himself, his company and his economic ideas. Those sources are fine to verify Mr. Newton's own statements, but they are not suitable to establish notability (in Wikipedia's sense of the term). The article needs independent sources with in-depth coverage about Elixirr, not just mere repetitions of statements from Elixirr. That's a crucial difference. GermanJoe (talk) 16:52, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 16:26, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 17:25, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more week to improve quality
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Wikienglish123 (talk) 02:14, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2015 November 3. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:42, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I concur. The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:46, 3 November 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.