Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Best Practices, LLC

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. Sam Walton (talk) 08:55, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Best Practices, LLC

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is highly promotional to start, but more importantly the company does not appear to have sufficient secondary source coverage to meet notability requirements. In the secondary sources cited, the company or CEO are tangentially mentioned or quoted, but they are not the subject. Although this company's name makes it tricky to Google, I have been unable to find further secondary source mentions. Agtx (talk) 05:27, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of US-related deletion discussions. Arr4 (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Arr4 (talk) 07:19, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:CORPDEPTH. Several trivial mentions, some of which are in independent sources, but no significant coverage. The only source that might possibly qualify as non-trivial is the inc.com case study from 2001, but I don't think that cuts it on its own. The company's website has been repeatedly spammed to various Wikipedia articles for the last couple of years, so it does seem as if they have tried to use Wikipedia as an advertising platform. --bonadea contributions talk 09:08, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:20, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:20, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 ^Talk 14:02, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Promotional and fails to assert notability. Zeus ^t^{| u | c} 00:02, 19 July 2015 (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.