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. czar 12:20, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nuffnang[edit]

Nuffnang (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)

Struggling to find any independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources - lack of WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:NCORP. Promotional article, created by a WP:SPA. Edwardx (talk) 22:52, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:57, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:57, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:57, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:57, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:58, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:58, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:59, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:59, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 02:00, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 02:00, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 02:01, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The current text is spammy, and there seems to be no reason to think this IT company meets WP:ORG Nick-D (talk) 08:20, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• [1][2][3] are the best sources, which are ok but really don't have as much analysis as I'd like. There's also [4] and some coverage of its parent company including [5] which I can't access. Overall a weak keep Galobtter (pingó mió) 04:41, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Response Galobtter, can you revisit your !vote in light of the requirements in ORGIND? Especially the part about "Intellectual Independence". Thank you! HighKing⁺⁺ 12:59, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • I was waffling over weak delete vs weak keep before writing my !vote. I looked over the sources again, and yeah I guess they don't really have much independant content.. weak delete it is then Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:34, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete References fail the criteria for establishing notability. References must contain intellectually independent content. Independent content, in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. I cannot identify any sources that meet the criteria, topic fails NCORP and GNG. HighKing⁺⁺ 12:59, 12 September 2018 (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.