Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AsiaNet

:{{la|AsiaNet}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/AsiaNet Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|AsiaNet}})

Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG. Unable to find sources that are in-depth about the service. Not to be confused with "Asianetnews.tv" which comes up in search. The website statistics from Alexa show it ranking 3million+ which means it has very little traffic. Simply not-notable according to Wikipedia guidelines. CNMall41 (talk) 22:16, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:57, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:58, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

• Delete: per nom. Not a notable company -- Whats new?^(talk) 09:01, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
• Delete -- unsourced corporate spam. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:06, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
• Delete It's highly unlikely that a company that collates press releases would ever meet WP:ORG. Nick-D (talk) 04:58, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
• Delete cannot find anything to indicate notability or industry special presence. Now merged into List of press release agencies. Aoziwe (talk) 11:48, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
• Delete Misleading brand name. Nothing significant about this one Light2021 (talk) 20:15, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
• Delete: Per nom, WP:CORP, and WP:GNG. GauchoDude (talk) 13:08, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
• Delete Per nomination. Not notable, not a worthwhile article, and just a list of notable press companies. lbmarshall (talk) 17:39, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.