Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Securtix

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. (soft) slakr^\ talk / 04:01, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Securtix

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

Inadequately sourced article about a product. I am unable to find sources that cover the subject in any depth. Fails WP:GNG. - Mr X 14:52, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:10, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

In fact it`s difficult to find valuable sources about the topic! Today I found and added further links of publications from travel industry journals. Indeed in the airline industry Securtix is well known as a trademark. We should have a close look to the subject an then decide if it`s useful to have a definition about it in wikipedia.--Rechercha (talk) 15:45, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There are no many sources in fact, but you can be able to find sources about the subject which explain in depth the brand and he product itself, I have found some links about, but there is one that explains how it works [1] More over, there have been cases where this service has been very useful for stranded passengers, for example when OLT Germany Express was insolvent, and securtix protected the passengers [2] For my side I think is useful people can have a definition in wikipedia to know more about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafagom (talk • contribs) 13:41, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I also added some magazines' links in the article Rafagom (talk) 13:58, 22 May 2014 (UTC)R— Rafagom (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker ^talk 17:19, 28 May 2014 (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.