Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Powerplus Group

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. Kurykh (talk) 04:10, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Powerplus Group

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

A second article on the same non-notable company. Taken the two together, it clearly shows a promotional campaign. The only other activity of the contributor is trying to insert the company name in a large number of articles. see the COInoticeboard, [1]

Clearly an undeclared paid editor, continuing as such despite multiple warnings. 'We ought to have a speedy criteria for such cases. DGG' ( talk ) 07:47, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 08:13, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 08:14, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 08:14, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete & salt Persistent spam from a WP:SPA. Cabayi (talk) 08:22, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Clearly created by an employee of the company for promotional purposes, and Wikipedia does not tolerate promotion. And yes, the sooner we have a speedy deletion criterion to cover this kind of thing, the better. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:45, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: the other article from the same editor is under discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Powerpac International. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:45, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as obvious WP:SOAPBOX. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:33, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Obvious WP:PROMO, with nothing to fill WP:GNG. TheMagikCow (T) (C) 19:41, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG. Edwardx (talk) 22:59, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and GNG. Utter spam. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 15:39, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Obvious spam is obvious. --Guy Macon (talk) 15:40, 14 May 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.