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 keep. (non-admin closure) TBrandley ^{(what's up)} 00:35, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Carmen Media (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Not notable, no sources, likely created by the subject or their associates. DegenFarang (talk) 23:35, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I found a news reference at www.online-casinos.com/news/news2200.asp but that site appears to be blacklisted. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 23:40, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Some court cases involving this company and internet gambling are cited in this Google Books search. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 23:54, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 23:40, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 February 18. Snotbot  t • c »  00:31, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep Nom has AFD'd a batch of articles created by User:2005 as part of what appears to be an ongoing feud between these two editors. Such a waste of the community's time should not be condoned. Toohool (talk) 07:55, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The ad hominem attack is not appropriate or appreciated. Please discuss content and not people. Do you have a specific objection to this article being deleted? DegenFarang (talk) 13:31, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination is in bad faith. You know very well that 2005 is not "the subject or their associates", seeing as you've made the same ad hominem attack against him regarding the American Gaming Association. Toohool (talk) 19:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your false accusations are not appreciated. I again ask you to stop making this personal and to assume good faith - in accordance with Wikipedia policy. I wasn't aware who created this article or the other. If one user created two spam articles that exist only to promote businesses, perhaps that might be cause for some kind of investigation into whether that user is being paid to promote businesses on Wikipedia, but that's above my pay-grade and outside the scope of this AFD. DegenFarang (talk) 19:48, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hours after clashing with 2005 at Talk:Steve Badger (poker player), you nominated 5 of his articles for deletion in the span of half an hour. It beggars belief to say that you were not aware of what you were doing. Toohool (talk) 06:07, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was seeking to cleanup articles that had external link spam and came across those. If they were all started by the same user, that is evidence that user creates spammy articles. I don't even know how to find articles created by a specific user. DegenFarang (talk) 07:04, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not a very believable story, considering that none of the articles contains any external links other than the subjects' official sites, and Sports betting systems contains no external links at all. Toohool (talk) 07:52, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, I was seeking such articles. I came across many with no external link problems - on these articles I found other problems. DegenFarang (talk) 08:01, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Unreferenced article about a commercial business. My understanding is that litigation reports generally are not enough to confer notability on a business, nor is trade coverage on a website about online casinos. The current article text is advertising. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:04, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Toohool. I find nothing in the argument offered that the company is not notable. Given that it has been in existence for at least 10 years, there is information out there like a 2006 proposed merger with a Canadian company. AFD is not a substitution for article cleanup. Likewise lack of references in the article is a sign of a badly written article which does not make a case for not being able to meet WP:V or WP:N. Likewise WP:SOFIXIT probably is the hammer that should be used to address this concern. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:53, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep , this article is one of a series of bad faith nominations by a indef blocked editor. [1] ▪◦▪≡SiREX≡^Talk 23:58, 22 February 2013 (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.