Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Euroscicon

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. Tone 16:56, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Euroscicon

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

fails WP:GNG, no indication of notabilty. Large coat rack of speakers and announcements, but no own merits The Banner talk 21:25, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete two of the sources are dailymail. fails GNG, obviously promotional. Jytdog (talk) 03:48, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nomination and WP:PROMO --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:10, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as entirely PR, nothing at all consisting of independent substance of how there's enough for its own notability, all enough for deleting. SwisterTwister talk 22:31, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- a non-notable event organiser; coverage is mostly PR / trivial. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:44, 25 August 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.