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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:15, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ORS Direct

[edit]

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

Fails corporate notability standards and web content notability standards. No indication of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources that conveys any notability. DrStrauss talk 11:04, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:06, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Vermont-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:07, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sadads (talk) 22:06, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- wow, it has survived this long? Purely promotional; no sources, except for promo web links. Basically, corporate spam. I would have requested deletion under G11, but not sure if the prior AfD would prevent that. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:51, 14 September 2017 (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.