Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Captive Minds Communications Group

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. Participants conclude there are not enough good sources to demonstrate notability. ~ mazca ^talk 22:38, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Captive Minds Communications Group (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)

Almost all sources are press releases or tangential. Does not pass notability standards for a company. Balle010 (talk) 05:06, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:52, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:52, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The Guardian looks like a decent source, but it's more about Marchus Chidgey than Captive Minds, and it's the only one that's not worthless as a WP:N source. Not surprising that this was created by an employee of the company. It's not bad enough to be G11 material, but it's a good example of why COI editing is strongly discouraged. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:51, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete nothing can be found to go toward notability. Wm335td (talk) 20:29, 9 September 2020 (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.