Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GetWellNetwork (2nd 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 Delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:38, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GetWellNetwork

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

Most sources are 404s, Ghits shows facebook, twitter and the like. Doesn't appear to pass WP:CORP at this point. Farmer Brown (talk) 23:07, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:58, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Music1201 ^talk 01:51, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: final relist — Music1201 ^talk 15:56, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Music1201 ^talk 15:56, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The sources that still exist are semi-local, and they sound split between paid PR and organic human interest news. Not sure how that stacks up, notability wise. The article itself reads like a bad infomercial once you reach the "Products" section, and the refs about it make the system sound laughably ill-conceived (GetWell systems come with a built-in AOL homepage!). Main editor "TCook" was originally named "GetWellNetwork". Probably deserves a COI smackdown. Jergling (talk) 19:19, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. promotional article with no real evidence of notability DGG ( talk ) 23:05, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete by all means and I comment because I speedied as G11. SwisterTwister talk 23:30, 31 July 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.