- 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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 20:57, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Media5 (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)
A WP:PROMO page on an unremarkable Canadian company. Does no meet WP:CORPDEPTH. Cannot find significant RS coverage; what comes up is trivial mentions and self-promotion link. The page was first created under Media5 Corporation and deleted twice under speedy delete and PROD. It's WP:TOOSOON for an encyclopedic entry. Edidiong (talk) 18:32, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:20, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:20, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:20, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - I assume good faith but the contributor's history causes me to suspect promotional intent. Deb (talk) 08:15, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The references here are not reliable or notability-assisting sources for the purposes of getting a company over WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH — they are press releases and entries in business directories, not media coverage about the company — but I can't find any evidence of the kind of sourcing we require. As always, Wikipedia is not a free public relations database on which a company is entitled to have an article just because it exists; we are an encyclopedia, on which a company has to surpass certain specific quantifiable standards of notability, and certain specific quantifiable standards of reliable source coverage about it in media, for an article to become earned. Bearcat (talk) 18:26, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: The Internet Telephony piece by Richard "Zippy" Grigonis is probably the most substantial, but consists of what the company says of itself and its product lines. Searches find more routine announcements, along with a notice of government aid granted to the firm ([1] – via HighBeam (subscription required) ) in 2005. Not enough to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 10:39, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Insufficient evidence of notability, Fails CORPDEPTH. --Guy Macon (talk) 13:32, 14 June 2018 (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.