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, obvious advertising and unreferenced article with no claim of minimal importance. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:25, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

EME Creative (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

the organisation is non-notable and I cannot find any secondary sources asserting its notability, there is also a conflict of interest issue Declan Clam (talk) 22:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Delete per A7 - this article about an organisation does not assert the notability of the subject. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:21, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete clear WP:ADVERTISING, single use account, blantent spam, why should it be kept again? --WngLdr34 (talk) 13:55, 2 October 2009 (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.