Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EOZY

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. postdlf (talk) 05:01, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

EOZY

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

There is no third-party reliable source to prove its notability. Reference #1~3 and #5~12 are all self-published (some are duplicated), while #4 and #13 lead to domain statistic websites, which can't be considered as primary sources. Zhaofeng Li [talk... contribs...] 14:37, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:30, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:30, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:30, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No reliable 3rd party sources to indicate notability. AllyD (talk) 18:50, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I've tried to improve it, but with no reliable 3rd party sources for notability, the dream is over. I have admitted defeat ages ago, and it is about time this article came to AfD. jcc (tea and biscuits) 19:02, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - It looks like an advertisement. STSC (talk) 00:49, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - can't find any reliable third party source to establish its notability. -Zanhe (talk) 19:06, 9 July 2013 (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.