Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Everipedia (3rd nomination)

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 delete. Repeated recreation of a page deleted per an AFD discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Everipedia (2nd nomination) Bishonen | talk 17:49, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Everipedia

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

NO significant evidence of notability from independent sources. Usual promotional push. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:11, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and salt. No indication that this subject has become more notable since it was deleted in September. VQuakr (talk) 20:57, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per WP:NCORP. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 21:54, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt - not again. Blythwood (talk) 23:15, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - agreed with all of the above, no reason for this promotional page to stay up. I landed here from google search and it was not very helpful as I had hoped. As a casual reader, I think this article lowers the quality of Wikipedia's name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.185.160.61 (talk) 06:08, 17 March 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.