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 Gazi moff 08:53, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GoDigital Media Group[edit]

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

Don't have any care if this is deleted or not, but it's been proposed for speedy three times and prodded once, so I thought AfD would be a better venue. Cheers, —Ed (talk • contribs) 02:37, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. — Jujutacular ^T · C 04:24, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Jujutacular ^T · C 04:24, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve. This has potential to be notable. -- ISLANDERS27 09:33, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I removed a speedy tag because I think the article at least asserts notability. Many of the references are press releases and such. These are what I found that might show notability: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. Enough? I don't know really.--Apoc2400 (talk) 11:15, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete those links merely prove that the subject exists, not that it is particularly notable -Drdisque (talk) 15:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. GoDigital Marketing Services focuses on Online PR and viral and interactive campaigns, and something highly unusual needs to happen before any business of this sort becomes an encyclopedia subject. The collection of press releases and self-published sources seem rather lawyerly, and do not at all establish the notability of the business. Of the two sources found by Google News, one is an offhand mention in an article about an entertainer they represent, and the other a puff piece about twenty-something proprietors. Neither of these really establish that this business has done anything historically important. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 19:42, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - non-notable company, no significant coverage, should have been speedied. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:52, 30 October 2009 (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.