Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IT Europa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Petros471 21:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] IT Europa

Advertisement consisting of 95% marketese and unverifiable claims. Article started by employee. Fredrik Johansson 10:39, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

  • In no instance is there any claims to the quality of this publication. As such, it merely informs readers of its history and remit. All claims are entirely verifiable and how is the "95pc marketese" figure ascertained? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.212.70.122 (talk • contribs) 16:33, 17 August 2006.
Formulations like
  • "subscriber base boasts readers from all the major US and European IT companies"
  • "King has an accomplished understanding of"
  • "joined the four-strong editorial team to deliver dedicated online news content to the European market"
don't belong in an encyclopedia. Neither does the information about the staff's affairs, which makes up most of the article. If the information is verifiable, prove it by citing references. Fredrik Johansson 13:25, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete No evidence of meeting WP:CORP via independent coverage, which we'd need to write an encyclopedic article. A magazine with 500 readers is not sufficiently notable to be kept as a publication. GRBerry 13:22, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

fine. delete then. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.212.70.122 (talk • contribs) .

  • The article has been changed slightly to adhere to the terms. WP:CORP does not state terms for size of readership.
It is much better now, but as GRBerry says no references to independent sources have been provided. Fredrik Johansson 15:53, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete unles independent sources provided. JPD (talk) 10:23, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Please advise on the type of appropriate independent source -
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.