Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tribal Fusion (ad network)

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. -- Cirt (talk) 18:15, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tribal Fusion (ad network)

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

2005 AfD resulted in "No Consensus", with keep votes all pushing for cleanup and expansion. 6 years later, article is still a stub reading as an advertisement, with 0 legitimate references. Their website also appears to have gone under, and I'm unable to establish any notability via searching outside of their own outdated page. — Jess· Δ ♥ 17:04, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nominator. — Jess· Δ ♥ 17:06, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:52, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:53, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:53, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unable to locate reliable sources. As per nom, article was never expanded, and appears to fail notability concerns. jsfouche ☽☾Talk 01:36, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I haven't done enough searching to comment on notability, but for the record, the company's website does work. (For me, anyway.) In addition, this press release shows that the company is still active. Zagalejo^^^ 07:00, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment You're correct about the marketwire article. However, that appears to be the only thing available documenting anything about the company, and as such, I'm not sure it warrants an article. If we had even a couple sources, I'd change my mind, but I've been unable to track down even low quality ones. The article started as an unsourced advertisement 6+ years ago, and I'm not sure it can ever get farther than that. — Jess· Δ ♥ 21:05, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment Well, there is some information out there. Nothing great - a short summary in a For Dummies book, a brief mention in a New York Times article, and stuff like this Zagalejo^^^ 22:11, 15 June 2011 (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.