Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IA Collaborative

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) 20:34, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

IA Collaborative

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

Corporate Spam. 1 Para to write about. Press coverage. Light2021 (talk) 18:35, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:32, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:33, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- the tag pretty much says it all: "article reads like a press release or a news article and/or is entirely based on routine coverage". This content can just as effectively be housed on the company's web site. No notability or significance here. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:19, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Seems to be composed of passing mentions.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:47, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Basically promotion, and not enough coverage to pass WP:GNG. RileyBugz ^会話 _投稿記録 23:07, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: sources don't give WP:SIGCOV and the whole article reeks of WP:PROMO. DrStrauss talk 16:01, 11 July 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.