Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RLM Public Relations

: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. J04n(talk page) 00:15, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

=[[RLM Public Relations]]=

:{{la|RLM Public Relations}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/RLM_Public_Relations Stats])

:({{Find sources|RLM Public Relations}})

non-notable PR company. Not the subject of multiple reliable sources. Created by an editor that seems to have a COI. Much of the information in the page is unsourced. Delete CitizenNeutral (talk) 00:58, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Weak keep Borderline case. The firm and its owner have gotten [http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=RLM+Public+Relations&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8#hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&tbs=ar:1&tbm=nws&sclient=psy-ab&q=%22RLM+Public+Relations%22&oq=%22RLM+Public+Relations%22&gs_l=serp.3...12511.14043.1.15139.2.2.0.0.0.0.211.418.2-2.2.0...0.0...1c.1.4.psy-ab.8opyFK9PtXc&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.42661473,d.b2I&fp=cead224623b47f32&biw=1003&bih=678 a few mentions by independent sources], the owner has been quoted in the [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/23/business/worldbusiness/23iht-23adcol.20362819.html?_r=0 New York Times] and [http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/USAToday/access/72618600.html?dids=72618600:72618600&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=May+08%2C+2001&author=Salina+Khan&pub=USA+TODAY&desc=Business+travelers%3A+Budget+cuts+hinder+work+efficiency&pqatl=google USA Today] and other publications, and the owner's book was reviewed by the [http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=CSTB&p_theme=cstb&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0F953DA621F5031C&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM Chicago Sun-Times]. I couldn't find any full-length significant articles about the company (unless the USA Today article is one - paywall), but I think the cites here and there may add up to a keep. --MelanieN (talk) 18:04, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Delete. Looking over the first few pages of Google News results, I don't see anything that looks like significant coverage, only incidental quotes by identified personnel, announcements that the firm had been hired or consulted, and similar rah-rah material. Nothing here suggests that this business has had significant effects on history, technology, or culture of the sort that will make it worthy of memory in an encyclopedia a hundred years from now. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:29, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JayJay^{What did I do?} 01:33, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Delete unreliable sources. prweb rings alarm bells for PR type advertorials. LibStar (talk) 05:30, 1 March 2013 (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.