Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Clovia References

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 speedy delete ( CSD G11; housekeeping closure) ( non-admin closure). Linguist ^talk| contribs 15:44, 29 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Clovia

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

The article is clearly written to promote company and nothing else. Light2021 ( talk) 19:37, 28 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Delete. possibly by speedy G11. Pure advertisement, with the pretense of being supported by sources, but they are PR — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG ( talk • contribs)
I'm sorry but I don't believe it's blatant enough for G11. The article has refs and a reasonable claim to notability, despite the spammy passages. Afd is the proper for forum for this, I believe. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 20:27, 28 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 20:28, 28 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 20:28, 28 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 20:28, 28 January 2017 (UTC) reply

'Speedy delete -- clear advertising created by a user with no other contributions: Special:Contributions/Shrutikapoor688. K.e.coffman ( talk) 06:01, 29 January 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.