Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ADO Group

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. Mojo Hand (talk) 04:11, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ADO Group (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)

Sister article Adopen just died at afd, and now I am turning the Adopen guns on ADO Group for the same reason I put Adopen up at AFD: Both pages appear to be twins separated at birth, both are overly bloated ads, both are poorly written, and now that Adopen is deleted I feel that ADO group should join its sister article in the digital dust bin since the article is written like an ad and asserts no notability. TomStar81 (Talk) 23:41, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:05, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:05, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: No evidence of notability found from multiple searches by both the English and Turkish firm name. (Note that there is also a Mexican transportation firm by this name who do have some coverage.) AllyD (talk) 06:46, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unable to find any evidence that the subject meets GNG or CORP. Cited sourced all fail WP:RS. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:41, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Don't Delete This group is obviously among biggest 200-300 jobs of Turkey with international investments in region, definetely important for the sector No evidence found in web comment is quite weird, there are min 4-5 pages in google for searches made from turkey location with ADO, ADO Grup, ADO Group, ADOPEN etc. Adopen is well known brand in Turkey, which was removed also from wiki on unfair ground. So why you have Deceuninck with all links etc. Same job even ADO & Adopen may be reporting even bigger profits. Deletion of ADOPEN was unfair, Deletion of ADO is also unfair. Additionally, deletion of proper articles on such basis, is discouraging to ppl who want to expand wiki as an global encyclopedic free resource. Deletion wont harm those corporations but wiki will miss the data for ppl searching for it anyway. User:Antalt07 (talk) 15:57, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No evidence of notability that meets criteria for inclusion. Amortias (T)(C) 21:59, 30 May 2014 (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.