Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sales Managers Index

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. czar ⨹ 21:10, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sales Managers Index

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

Article produced by spammer pushing one company's product NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:36, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a spammer, simply trying to explain the purpose and methodology behind the Indexes creation. I have added links to over 21 video's from main stream news outlets such as Sky News TV, Bloomberg TV and Dukascopy TV to show notability. I've also removed any references to how the concept is used to produce data to ensure it does not come across as "pushing a company product". these 21 videos hopefully are enough to show notability. I've done as much as I think I can do to convince you this is a legitimate subject and of interest to readers without pushing a product. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EdmundIJones (talk • contribs) 08:04, 13 November 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign your comments - that way others can leave messages for you, as I wished to do here. First, the videos need to be directly linked to the statements in the article, as references, if they are sources for the statements there. If they are not, they can be included in the external links section. The section called "Notability" would then be removed. The article needs other references, preferably print references (it is hard to verify references in news videos). There needs to be information on who produces the index, whether that organization is for- or non-profit, etc., as well as more verifiable references to its use. LaMona (talk) 20:16, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy so that references can be added and formatted. LaMona (talk) 20:16, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not yet notable. DGG ( talk ) 03:18, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deadbeef 10:10, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as clearly promotional. –Davey2010 • (talk) 16:57, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Does not pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies):the topic has not been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. - tucoxn\^talk 23:41, 26 November 2014 (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.