- 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. Popularity on the Internet is usually not enough to make something notable. Salting may be requested at WP:RFPP. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 16:18, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
CCAvenue
- CCAvenue ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable company. Nothing significant but another startup company. For being in Wikipedia need to be much more significant than this. Else Wikipedia will become a Startup directory. 1000s of startups happens every day. Just another one. Notability required repeated significant coverage by media as well as significance in itself. building Wikipedia page for their publicity, releasing articles on major media as paid. Covered once in a while. or covered mostly by Startup blogs not the notable media. If seen then left only 1 paragraph to say. It is not Encyclopedia notable. Definitely the article is written by close associate or company itself. Probably they should put Brochure instead. Light2021 ( talk) 17:17, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Delete and Salt as this is advertising and this alone, it was deleted once before as advertising, and this is so advert-like, it's tickling quite noticeably at speedy material, as not only is there barely any information (let alone actual substance), it only gives the illusions of what the company would say about itself, which is what it is, the services and other activities and people-groups involved. The listed "news" are clearly attempts of PR in that the company clearly supplied information about itself, because they are only things they themselves would know such as their company partners and clients, and that's what this field is notorious for, anything to sugarcoat PR and that alone. To state the obvious, this was started by an SPA account who only seems to be involving themselves with these exact articles and businesses, suggesting not only paid contributing but blatant advertising of it. SwisterTwister talk 21:41, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:58, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:58, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:PROMO; strictly advertising, with no encyclopedic value and no indications of notability or significance. Sources are very weak. K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:59, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Strong Keep CCAvenue is popular online payment gateway. It article should be improved. Jessie1979 ( talk) 12:59, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- [Revert as per WP:BLOCKEVASION using strikethrough font. 20:48, 13 November 2016 (UTC)]
- Popularity or making profit by any companies does not count for its notability or encyclopedia standards set by Wikipedia guidelines. It will make it Directory for such company. Light2021 ( talk) 15:29, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- 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.