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. Kurykh (talk) 03:21, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SIVOP[edit]

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

Fairly obvious piece of spam, translated from the French article which is (he's also been warned about undisclosed paid editing both there; and here. I've a previous incarnation to draftspace to allow the creator to work on it, but instead he just keeps recreating it with different capitalisation, hence bringing it here for a decision. The company itself almost certainly does meet notability requirements, but every incarnation of the article thus far has been far too promotional to be viable as a Wikipedia article. ‑ Iridescent 11:08, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to edit the article so that it will not appear so promotional. Thus, if you can help, it will be with pleasure --Jaberahmad (talk) 11:48, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 12:19, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - As the article stands, WP:BLOWITUP. The company ought to be notable, but this article doesn't do the job. The claim to own The Body Shop is totally unsupported; too many of the sources are SIVOP's own website; the language is too promotional ("offering" products comes a close second to Z-list celebrities "welcoming" their babies in my eyes). A good faith ((db-g7)) from Jaberahmad on the article and an undertaking to build the draft & take it through the WP:AFC process seems the best way forward for both the article's development and overcoming Jaberahmad's COI. Cabayi (talk) 12:39, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as very blatant promotion but one that passes WP:GNG. As said above, let's WP:BLOWITUP and write it neutrally. MereTechnicality ⚙ 15:08, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note Jaberahmad has disclosed his paid editing on Talk:SIVOP and the French article's talk page. --Drm310 (talk) 17:02, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am listening to any suggestion for editing the page. Waiting for your suggestions, thank you.--Jaberahmad (talk) 13:04, 16 February 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.