Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Human Kinetics (publisher)

: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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:56, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

=[[Human Kinetics (publisher)]]=

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

:({{Find sources AFD|Human Kinetics (publisher)}})

This advertorial lacks substantive sources. It has been tagged with serious issues for years with no resolution (and none apparently possible). Virtually all substantive content is by a small number of WP:SPAs. While it has superficial referenciness, the references themselves are press releases, namechecks, product listings or directories. None of the purported sources establishes notability per WP:GNG, none of them amounts to any independent article about this subject. Guy (Help!) 07:45, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:58, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:58, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Delete per nom - David Gerard (talk) 18:48, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:26, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:27, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Delete per WP:PROMO and WP:WEBHOST. With sections such as "Corporate responsibility initiatives" one knows that this unambiguous advertising. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:12, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Delete and this is another case where I would consider speedy, only complete PR is listed and nothing is convincing. SwisterTwister talk 04:21, 31 August 2016 (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.