Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AutoX

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--Ymblanter (talk) 07:40, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AutoX

AutoX (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)

Fails WP:CORP. This article is based on press releases and the subject's own website. Lacks sustained, in-depth coverage from quality independent sources. Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:09, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:49, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:49, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:49, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete promo advert of just another auto magazine, no in-depth coverage in independent sources Kraxler (talk) 14:31, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as per nom and Kraxler's comments. No significant coverage. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:05, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete for now, unfortunately, as my searches found nothing even in the least good aside from this and this. SwisterTwister talk 05:01, 16 August 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.