Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ematic Solutions

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) 06:03, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ematic Solutions

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

My extensive PROD removed with the basis of the TechinAsia article but that one is essentially simply a profile for the company and contains noticeable amounts of interviewed information from start to finish, from A to Z, and the article contains images that suggest this also, my PROD included searches that showed nothing suggesting better otherwise and this is another AfC submission that should not have been accepted considering these concerns and the fact the history suggests paid PR, something of which is not surprising since both the history and account are similar in showing no new activities, aside from heavily focusing with this one article. SwisterTwister talk 05:28, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:29, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:29, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:30, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom the sourcing is bad and unconvincing, and the article clearly a promo - David Gerard (talk) 07:56, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- strictly "corporate spam" and client prospectus in the form of a Wikipedia article. Nothing to salvage here. K.e.coffman (talk) 08:25, 5 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.