Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevinmap
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- 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. SpinningSpark 18:26, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Kevinmap (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Website with no evidence of notability. No WP:RS in English that I can find; Chinese sources may exist but I cannot find any (in my limited capability to do so, of course). Possible WP:COI given the author's name. Kinu t/c 08:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Unremarkable software and/or website; fails basic WP:GNG. §FreeRangeFrog 22:03, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Do not delete Website is used by 20+ NGOs in China, including Liao Xiaoyi's Global Village of Beijing. Search of "kaiwenmap beijing" on Google shows several employees of the enterprise. No WP:COI for author.§Wendylinlu 15:34, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:17, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:17, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:17, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jenks24 (talk) 09:35, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Not notable website ad, self-produced solitary reference. --Modern.Jewelry.Historian (talk) 21:55, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 00:18, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete fails WP:GNG. 0 hits on LexisNexis. If it was notable, someone would have written something about it somewhere. --Odie5533 (talk) 07:49, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.