Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AlaTest

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:51, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AlaTest (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Nothing significant but another startup company for being encyclopedia. For being in Wikipedia need to be much more significant than this. Else Wikipedia will become a Startup directory. 1000s of startups happens every day. Just another one. Notability required repeated significant coverage by media as well as significance in itself. building Wikiepdia page for their publicity. Light2021 (talk) 21:17, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:59, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:59, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:59, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• delete Red Herring 100 is nice, but doesn't swing it for notability. Before I culled it just now the External Links was literally every national URL they had. A basic WP:BEFORE turns up not even unreliable sources. The nicest thing I can say is that this a startup that hasn't unleashed a flood of promotional churnalism - David Gerard (talk) 09:27, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. as David Gerard says, there is insufficient evidence of notability, at lest not yet. DGG ( talk ) 04:13, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as spam, and nothing else at this time. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:20, 8 October 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.