Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elite SEM

: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. Davewild (talk) 19:41, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

=[[Elite SEM]]=

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

:({{Find sources AFD|Elite SEM}})

I came across this via speedy deletion and the Crain's source and the link to the clients gave off enough of an assertion of notability to where I figured that it'd be better off going to AfD. The problem though is that ultimately I just can't find coverage to really show how this company is notable. I'd redirect it to the founder, but he has some big notability issues as well. He and the company appear to be known, but I don't particularly see where that's translated into notability. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:43, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORP. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:53, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Delete "Known but not notable" should be a thing. Brianhe (talk) 17:37, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

:*That's not a bad idea. It looks like it'd fall under WP:POPULARITY, so I'll ask if something like that can be added there. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Delete - I try to make a special effort to comment on articles about marketing, as one of very few prolific editors with a background in it. In this sector, we need to be even more cautious than usual about awards, because there are so many awards in the PR field that are trivial or pay for play. Note in this case for example there were more than 15 categories to win in, and with dozens of awards like this, everyone has won a bunch of them. Most of the awards listed do not meet the criteria at WP:ORGAWARDS and even if they did, an article on the company focused exclusively on the awards they have won is not acceptable. CorporateM (Talk) 19:45, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Delete and Salt. [http://searchengineland.com/leveraging-wikidata-gain-google-knowledge-graph-result-219706 SEO] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tonyeny&diff=668701707&oldid=668672138 spam][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tonyeny#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Elite_SEM mer]. --Atlasowa (talk) 14:12, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

: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.