Welcome to roadsat.com on July 12 2009.
This is an internet experiment running to monitor browsing habbits of individuals through wikipedia contents.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Business

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Points of interest related to Business on Wikipedia
Portal – Category – WikiProject – Stubs – Deletions – Cleanup
Deletion Sorting
Project
Project page (talk)
Lists (by ABC)
Lists (by topic)
AfD: Today, Yesterday
edit · changes

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Business. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting.

Anyone can help maintain the list on this page:

  • To add a new AfD discussion (once it has already been opened on WP:AFD):
  • Look through the list of current discussions to find items related to this subject area.
  • Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  • You can also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Business}}<small>—~~~~</small> to it, which will inform users that it has been listed here.
  • There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
  • Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
  • You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Business.

Please note that adding an AfD to, or removing it from, this page does not add it to, or remove it from, the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page, before adding it to this page.

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archive Relevant archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Business/archive.
Purge page cache Watch this page


Contents

[edit] Business

[edit] Hyde + Hyde Architects

Hyde + Hyde Architects (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

declined speedy. looks like spam. fails WP:ORG, no third party coverage in gnews [1]. LibStar (talk) 13:31, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Wrestlicious

Wrestlicious (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Non-notable company that fails to verify any sort of notability with reliable sources. Has very few Google News hits. Nominated after PROD was removed. Scjessey (talk) 05:53, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Delete - Does not meet WP:NOTE, no references. -- Sk8er5000 (talk) 05:54, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

References added. The company is notable because it involves a WWE Hall Of Famer, Jimmy Hart, and was founded by the youngest powerball winner ever, Jonathan Vargas. Lacey Von Erich, whose family was inducted into the WWE Hall Of Fame in 2009, is the company's featured star. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RassleFan123 (talk • contribs) 06:09, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete: Nothing you just mentioned established anymore notability. There is no reliable third party site within the article. The only reliable ones are all primary, and primary sites don't establish notability, third party does.--WillC 11:04, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment rather than add external links to the references section, references need to be citations (see WP:CITE) especially since there really isn't much claim of notability in the article itself, just the existence of this group.--RadioFan (talk) 12:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
    • The user does not know how. He or she is inexperienced. The user once told me that he was one of creators of the promotion, so if that is true, then this is technically an advertisement. Looking at his edits, he must think that you place the links in the reference section to make them appear like the one already in there.--WillC 12:35, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 14:40, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete for now, there seems to be no third party sources available. According to the website [2], the promotion is appearing on TV this fall, so it may be notable then...Therefore, I say delete for now with no prejudice for recreation in the future if it meets the notability guidelines. Nikki♥311 18:08, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Heidi Montag Records

Heidi Montag Records (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

No significant coverage in third party sources (or any coverage at all, really). This article fails WP:CORP. --Pokerdance (talk/contribs) 19:32, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Delete --this google search shows that the Wikipeida article is the only article to actually discuss the company. Every other hit is about Montang recording music. So pretty much this is the only site that's talking about the record company, (well there is a myspace about the company but that is not a reliable source.) So. Delete. (I also tried an image search to maybe find a logo and still no results) KMFDM FAN (talk!) 20:18, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Eatonville Restaurant

Eatonville Restaurant (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

non notable restaraunt WuhWuzDat 17:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

And merge the rest to the owner per Lefty. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Merge the most important information to Andy Shallal and maybe Zora Neale Hurston. I tried adding reliable sources but I could only find local newspapers and blogs. Theleftorium 19:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete - not notable. andy (talk) 10:12, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Merge into Andy Shallal, seems appropriate per lack of reliable secondary sources.Ottawa4ever (talk) 20:38, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Munsch Hardt Kopf & Harr P.C.

AfDs for this article:
Articles for deletion/Munsch Hardt Kopf & Harr P.C.
Munsch Hardt Kopf & Harr P.C. (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

This does not have any real assertion of notability and is much too promotional in tone. It was written by one "User:RightFirmRightNow" who appears to be a COI. Triplestop x3 02:25, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete advertising. One could also argue this as an A7 speedy. I really don't see any assertion of notability. Resolute 02:59, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Definitely advertising spam. Dancing is Forbidden (talk) 06:25, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete as per above. Bobak (talk) 06:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 09:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:59, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] NetSPI

AfDs for this article:
Articles for deletion/NetSPI Articles for deletion/NetSPI (2nd nomination)
NetSPI (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Reinstated following earlier speedy deletion / AfD, but even with latest edits+improvements doesn't appear to be a notable company per WP:CORP. --Oscarthecat (talk) 20:32, 9 July 2009 (UTC) Oscarthecat (talk) 20:32, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 00:48, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Gateway Pictures

Gateway Pictures (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Contested prod. No assertations of notability in the article, no independent references from reliable sources. While there was a Gateway Pictures that made the 1939 film mentioned, I don't beileve this is the same company - the website domain was only created last year through GoDaddy. TheRealFennShysa (talk) 15:20, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete a shimmering logo does not an article make. Darrenhusted (talk) 17:16, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep No evidence that the companies are different OR the same. Therefore, I recommend removing this article's deletion status and maintaining its stub status so other users can (hopefully) build upon this info. FennShysa offers no evidence that this is spam other than his own "belief". Aliveatoms (talk) 17:48, 9 July 2009 (UTC)— Aliveatoms (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete No assertion of notability, other than a movie which doesn't appear to be notable itself. external links lead nowhere, and tell you nothing. WuhWuzDat 18:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • STRONGLY DISAGREE - KEEP I feel this is bordering on an edit war, and strongly feel this article should not be deleted. This article in no way violates the five pillars of Wikipedia. This is a valid encyclopedia entry because it is of historical fact that this company produced the 1939 film. Further more, Amazon cites the film as "one of the top 100 classic films of all time". I think what is causing the problems is the web site, which I agree can neither be proven nor disproven to be the same "Gateway Pictures". Therefore, I request that this deletion status be immediately removed (there are many other pages with much less info available that are part of the wikipedia). Furthermore, I submit that as a compromise, the link to the web page also be removed from the wiki entry, and that we leave this as stub status so others can contribute relevant info. Aliveatoms (talk) 20:55, 9 July 2009 (UTC)— Aliveatoms (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
User has already registered a boldfaced "keep" opinion above; I've therefore struck this one out. You get only one, Aliveatoms. Deor (talk) 01:08, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 00:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Hancock Studios

Hancock Studios (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

If this had just shown up, I would have agreed to the G11 speedy deletion, since it's an obvious attempt to sell porn, but since it's been around in roughly this form for 3 years (sigh), this requires AfD, I think. I just softblocked the company-promoting username of the article creator ... better late than never. - Dank (push to talk) 20:20, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

To the best of my knowledge, this is an unresolved question. Does a 3-year history on Wikipedia mean all by itself that the deletion is likely to be contested by somebody, and therefore not suitable for a prod? Some people say "don't bother us at AfD if you think you know that it's promotional", some people say "2 people shouldn't overrule the hundreds or thousands who saw this article and passed by without complaining, it should be a community decision". I'd love to know the answer so that I ... and more importantly, the taggers ... feel confident in our decisions. - Dank (push to talk) 21:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, that is a good reason for not using a speedy, but a PROD does give people time to object. AIUI if something is deleted via a prod and someone later contests it, it is routineley restored and brought to AfD anyway. This is however just my ha'penny's worth! Thryduulf (talk) 21:46, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Fold7

Fold7 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Fails WP:CORP. Google searches do not make notability clear.

Google · news · scholar - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 13:08, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep. The Grauniad and BBC refs provided show notability. I42 (talk) 21:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] First2Save

First2Save (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Possibly fails notability guidelines. I am not able to locate any sources that confirm it being the most successful eBay business; possibly a spam hoax. Nick—Contact/Contribs 00:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

  • This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 11:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:24, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Double price discrimination

Double price discrimination (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Term appears to be original research, with no cites to reliable sources to back it up. This Google search shows only two usages of the term other than in mirrors of the article itself, and furthermore, the two usages I can find appear to use the term in different senses to one another, and neither of them appears to use the term the sense given in the article. The Anome (talk) 06:43, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Redirect to either price discrimination or consumer surplus. Having forks for technical articles is inherently problematic (due to synchronizing and accuracy issues), particularly when one of the terms is not notable itself. How long til we have triple price discrimination? Shadowjams (talk) 08:31, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. —Thryduulf (talk) 11:12, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete This article seems to be a WP:MADEUP term. The references included in the page never mention this term or anything related to it. A search of Google, Google Books and Google Scholar revealed nothing to indicate this term has ever been used in any type of economic sense. Rcurtis5 (talk) 14:00, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Cavallino LLC

Cavallino LLC (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Non-notable company. Article is written like a cross between an advert and a bio for the founder. Only thing that's even close to notability is that the founder wrote a book, but as notability isn't inherited so therefore cannot be carried on to the company. SPA user whose first edit was to remove the CSD notice, followed by their 2nd edit to remove it again, so it seems there's some CoI there. Rather than getting into an edit war I've brought it to afd. WebHamster 22:56, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete. Seems to be entirely spammish. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 23:24, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • POLITE REQUEST FOR HOLD UPON DELETE. Our first attempt to add our verifiable corporate information simply requires a more comprehensive understanding of Wiki source code updates in order to demonstrate content validity. No spam has been added, only three users (each authorized editors for the corporation) have worked in tandem. Advice and/or polite guideance would be greatly apreciated from the community. --TexasMikeRyan (Rawr and stuff) 01:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC) — TexasMikeRyan (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
    • Well, first, the best advice I can give in adding your own corporate information is simple: don't add it. See that link as to why - it will explain my !vote. Let other people add it. As for formatting, all the basics are at Wikipedia:Introduction. Tutorials, formatting, everything - it's found there. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 05:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 00:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. See WP:NOTADVERTISING. Fails WP:SOURCES. Looks like a definite case of WP:COI as well. ThePointblank (talk) 06:52, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. Per nom. 174.146.255.7 (talk) 08:38, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep. Article must have been updated, sounds objective and factual...not advertising. Plus, the board member is former president of the Fed in San Francisco. Company has been relevant in business field. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CBthilla (talk • contribs) 01:47, 9 July 2009 (UTC) — CBthilla (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
No imputation, but merely a notice: please see Wikipedia:Single-purpose account.
~~ Phoe talk ~~ 19:55, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Mel Wheeler, Inc.

Mel Wheeler, Inc. (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

This article is about an owner of a few radio stations in Virginia. I know from my own knowledge that this company used to own a television station in my area. However, my own knowledge doesn't suffice for actual research. It is very poorly written, with little to no research done on it. I tried to find further information to help the article on Google, to no avail. Their website says it's under construction. I can find no record of their headquarters in Texas. Seems like somebody from the company wrote this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlh56880 (talk • contribs) 2009/07/07 11:08:17

  • This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 12:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Frontside Promotions

Frontside Promotions (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Article has no independent sources, and was so-tagged since Dec 2008. So, it fails WP:CORP. Article is mainly promotional. They've worked with famous groups/people, but so have lots of other non-notable organizations. Rob (talk) 05:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. —Rob (talk) 05:53, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep Seems like they worked with a lot of well known and famous artists on a professional level, but it sounds kind of like name throwing. Should have more research to keep it alive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlh56880 (talk • contribs) 06:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. Notability is not inherited. I presume that a publicity firm will know the value of Wikipedia for search engine visibility, and as such lawyering over their notability is a side issue when the article in question also reads like obvious advertising: ...an independent promotions company in Vancouver, BC, specializing in all areas of the music industry, including but not limited to Commercial/non-Commercial Radio Promotion, Publicity, Street/Lifestyle Marketing, Online Marketing, and Artist Management. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:31, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete per the umlauted editor above. Obvious advert, no sources. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:01, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:44, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:44, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:44, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Please Keep. As the primary purpose of a promotion company is to help promote the client's brand over that of the company itself, there will necessarily be fewer independent, secondary sources describing Frontside with which to work. That being said, I have come across articles on Frontside, and it is my intention to prove notability based on what I was able to find.

That the wording reads like an advertisement is something that can and will be changed, but I do not believe that this justifies the deletion of this article. First and foremost, Frontside Promotions Group IS the largest independent promotions company in Canada. This statement is based on the fact that the promotion for most major U.S. artists is either handled in-house by an artist's record label or through a U.S.-based promotion company. It is also based on Frontside Promotion Group's client list, which includes Motley Crue (publicity, radio promotion, and Crue Fest promotion), Barenaked Ladies (publicity and radio promotion), Sum 41 (radio promotion), and Hinder (radio promotion). Frontside is also hired by the Canadian government to promote Canadian Blast ([5], [6]), a government-led initiative that highlights Canadian music internationally through media and live performances.

Aside from a list of clients (that can be found in this article), the most relevant evidence for the notability of Frontside Promotions Group would be their radio chart numbers (Billboard, Nielsen BDS, & Mediabase certified), and I will post those numbers once I have received them. As of now, I only know that Frontside has brought Sum 41, State of Shock, Drowning Pool, The Airborne Toxic Event, Metric, The Midway State, and Hinder to Top 20, Top 10, and #1 spots. Exact years and highest rank on radio charts per track will be posted when they are made available to me. Evidence of affiliation can also be found for the following artists: The Proclaimers (prominently featured at the bottom), State of Shock (within the biography), and House of Doc.

External organizations that have recognized Frontside's work include:
- SOCAN (Canada's Performing Rights Organization), for whom managing partner Gary McDonald has given lectures on marketing as well as presented for their "Dinner Music" web-series.
- The Music BC Industry Association's Board of Directors, to which managing partner Geoff Goddard has been accepted.
- The PEAK Performance Project, for which Frontside's product manager Erin Kinghorn is a member of the faculty.
- The Western Canadian Music Awards, which nominated Frontside Promotions Group for "Independent Publicist/Radio Promoter" of the year in 2004, less than 1 year after Frontside was founded.
- The Transmission Music Conference, which selected a Frontside managing partner as 1 of only 29 delegates from prominent Canadian music companies to attend the conference in China.
- Canada's International Music Convention "Canadian Music Week," which identified artist manager Vince Ditrich in their list of "Movers and Shakers."
- The New Music West - Music Industry Conference, at which multiple members of the Frontside team have presented to other music industry professionals.
- Freedom To Groove, which awarded Frontside a PromoFACT award in April 2004, and for whom managing partner Geoff Goddard served on a panel in November 2004.


I hope that you have found my response helpful and will reconsider the deletion of this article. Thank you.

User:Red Vinyl 8:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

  • None of the links involves substantial coverage by an independent source, which our notability guideline requires. One shows Frontside *didn't* win an award. Most show people who work at FrontSide have worked at other companies. One seems to shows a "PromFACT award" by a fellow non-notable marketing company, who shares a senior employee, which makes the source non-independent. Please DO NOT post anymore unsourced information about Frontside. Please only add material that's sourced to independent third-party reliable sources. If you personally work for Frontside, it is recommended that you mention that, and you not write about something you have a conflict of interest in. --Rob (talk) 09:52, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I am not employed by Frontside. I am currently working in performing rights and have worked for management companies in the past. At each location, there have been multiple artists whose Canadian promotion, radio promotion, and publicity have been handled by Frontside, and it was through these connections that I came to see Frontside as a major player in the music industry, especially when Canada is involved. The purpose of mentioning the nomination - while it is true that they did not win that award - was to show that they were considered noteworthy despite having only recently formed less than 1 year before. The other links do not involve past employment, but instead requests by those companies for outside industry professionals (ie, the Frontside staffers) to share their knowledge and outlook on the music industry with other professionals in music. --User:Red Vinyl 15:44, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] United Furniture Warehouse

United Furniture Warehouse (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Page reads like an advert. The previous version (April 2009) did not assert notability, and was little more than an advert. Martin451 (talk) 02:26, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Note: Article has been almost completely rewritten and nominators concerns seem to have been alleviated. –xenotalk 04:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Strong keep - national chain. Needs a cleanup. –xenotalk 02:29, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
    • That reads much better now, and my concerns have been alleviated. Martin451 (talk) 20:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Unless someone provides reliable and independent sources with significant coverage. Running TV ads does not provide inherent notability in Wikipedia. Edison (talk) 02:49, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
    Please take another look. I'll be working a bit more on it, but as you can see it's easily sourcible, and obviously notable. –xenotalk 03:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep Major national chain, hasn't everyone in the nation heard of this? If you delete this, then you need to start deleting stuff like Target Corporation. Easily meets WP:CORP Nfitz (talk) 03:04, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment If that is your standard, then I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF IT. Edison (talk) 04:19, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
    Aren't you in the U.S.? –xenotalk 04:22, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
    Comment It got a little coverage when its U.S. operations failed and were closed. Only television viewers in the few states it operated in heard its supposedly "catchy" jingle. Whatever nation it operated in before its massive retrenching, someone in AFD asserting that they are familiar with it, is still original research and does not satisfy the requirement for multiple reliable and independent sources with significant coverage required by Wikipedia's notability guideline. The limited coverage of it does not seem up the the level of coverage we have required in the past for businesses. Edison (talk) 13:19, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
    Have you looked at the article again since you voted? –xenotalk 14:21, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
    I noted that that it's a major national chain, and that would have though that everyone in the nation has heard of it. As the company is Canadian, if you haven't heard of it, then you are likely a foreigner ... Nfitz (talk) 22:39, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
    In theory, someone from out east might not have heard of it, but based on Edison's contributions I would hazard a guess he's American. I've queried him on his talk page as his comments subsequent to the re-writing of the article give the impression he hasn't actually looked at it. As the nominator has affirmed that his concerns have been resolved, Edison's !vote is the only one holding up a snow closure. –xenotalk 22:57, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep National Canadian chain, satisfies WP:CORP easily. - 2 ... says you, says me 13:26, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep The six provided sources are reliable and independent Rirunmot (talk) 16:05, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep Not really like an advert at this point. Verifiable and notable. What more do you want? Ntsimp (talk) 20:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep per the above arguments. The chain is quite notable. --FlyingPenguins (talk) 01:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep per above chain is very notable. --Kyle1278 03:50, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep My memory isn't always five-star, but didn't this chain also have stores in Idaho, Montana, and North Dakota for a while? They've been in Southern Ontario for at least 15 years, and in my city for about 5. They're going pretty strong and they're well-known in Canada. RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 07:14, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Catapult Systems

Catapult Systems (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Smallish consulting firm in Texas with no mainstream media coverage; refs are all press releases. —Chowbok ☠ 21:29, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete. per nom. Possibly a spam advertisement. -- Ray-Ginsay (talk) 05:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Per nom, borderline WP:SPEEDY G11 but has some encyclopedic contentRcurtis5 (talk) 16:17, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:12, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep - Catapult Systems is a legit, national Microsoft IT consulting company that has been in business since 1993. And, they have stellar customer list. Nancyrush (talk) 16:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Nobody is questioning your company's legitimacy, or that of your customers. Please don't take this as a referendum on that or on Catapult's worth or anything else. We just try to limit the coverage here (on every subject) so that Wikipedia doesn't get excessively unwieldy. Please read WP:ORG to see our rules on inclusion for businesses, and let us know if you still think the company should have an article when going of those, and, if so, why.—Chowbok ☠ 17:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
      • Thanks much, we understand the situation now. We do believe the company should have an article; to support this we've added a number of secondary references to show national media coverage, and will continue to do so on a regular basis as Catapult Systems continues to grow and receive accolades that are of national interest.--Nancyrush (talk) 19:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete - I don't see significant coverage from independent reliable sources. What I do see is a lot of press releases. -- Whpq (talk) 19:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Unify4life

Unify4life (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

There's enough at [7] to avoid a speedy deletion (from me anyway), but not enough to avoid AfD. Note the copyvio and the promotionalism. I'm not opposed to having something about Unify4life on Wikipedia, maybe a short article or just a mention, but not this article. - Dank (push to talk) 21:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Quantronix Corporation

Quantronix Corporation (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

While this company meets WP:N IMO, a lot of the text is copied straight from the links given, and it currently is little more than a vanity page. ARS could easily save this one (I would myself, but I unfortunetaly lack the time). Currently deletable per WP:COPYVIO and flirts with WP:SPAM, hence the nomination. Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 18:51, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Rename and merge into an article on Excel Technology which seems to be the parent company. Incorporated: 1985 Employees: 619

Sales: $122.68 million (2003) Stock Exchanges: NASDAQ Ticker Symbol: XLTC ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Deutsche Pfandbrief Holding AG

Deutsche Pfandbrief Holding AG (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

This article is really a direct copy of Hypo Real Estate, with Deutsche Pfandbrief Holding AG written in its place (and the latter company results in a single Google hit). There is no speedy criteria for this kind of situation, so I brought it here. THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL 16:07, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Comment. This may (or may not) shed some light on the matter. This looks to me like an attempt at a copy-and-paste page move rather than at creating a new article. Phil Bridger (talk) 16:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:00, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] SoftJin

SoftJin (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

A nonnotable electronic design private company. [google news] appear to show only press releases and other company's own stuff. No independent verification of notable achievements. - Altenmann >t 15:46, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Active Release Techniques

Active Release Techniques (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Declining G11 speedy deletion. The news archive hits make me doubtful that we can get an article out of this, the topic and the language are considered promotional by most Wikipedians, and I'd be very surprised if there's no WP:COI here. On the other hand, there's room in Wikipedia for neutral articles for massage techniques, so maybe some of this material could be merged, I don't know. - Dank (push to talk) 18:53, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. -- - Dank (push to talk) 18:54, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- - Dank (push to talk) 18:54, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Promotional material. This is massage by another name, with a claim by a chiropracter that he invented it and people should only go to him. I don't think its even notable enough to be merged into the existing material on massage/sports massage/etc.Fuzbaby (talk) 18:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • please keep - Whether it is credited to any inventor or not is irrelevant to keeping this article. The ART is commonly used in North America (USA and Canada). It is a common certification that many chiropractors and other health parctictionars have. As many patients receive this type of massage, the article should objectively explain what this therapy is. -- User:ycherk04(talk)
  • Delete fails WP:GNG, just advertising for a fringe alt med "therapy". Verbal chat 19:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. Spam. Doctorfluffy (wanna get fluffed?) 20:44, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete The article is promotes a particular company clear spam.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 21:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • There's actually a few refs found in a news archive search, but whether or not it's enough to make this notable is kind of iffy. It does read as kind of promotional, so weak delete unless someone shows some stronger refs and how to use them. Tony Fox (arf!) 22:44, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep, purge, rewrite - This is a notable subject. However, there are no sources currently in play here. A Google Scholar search reveals a plethora of reliable sources discussing the subject including Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, Elsevier, Decision Making in Medicine and Journal of Musculoskeletal Medicine. The tone of the current article is overly-promotional but it can easily be rectified using any number of sources from Scholar and even from Google News searches and just plain Google searches.. -- əʌləʍʇ əuo-ʎʇuəʍʇ ssnɔsıp 00:49, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment Is it considered "Full Release Massage?" Edison (talk) 02:55, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Wait a week and delete if it doesn't get cleaned up. -- Brangifer (talk) 04:01, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Liquid nightclub

Liquid nightclub (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Non-notable nightclub chain. A7 was declined, but this fails WP:CORP by a city mile. Blueboy96 00:28, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 19:31, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 19:32, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Weak delete. Quite a lot of hits on GNews, but they seem to generally be about events or news stories that happen to be on or near these nightclubs. Having said that, a chain of thirty clubs may well have notability somewhere. For me, the tie-breaker is the overly-promotional tone of the article. As always, will reconsider if shown evidence of notability. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 21:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Triage Entertainment

Triage Entertainment (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Appears to be made by a user with COI on the subject. The article may be improved on, but for now I'll submit this for deletion. Blake Gripling (talk) 06:56, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 16:01, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:59, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] WePapers

WePapers (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

nn website Gotttor (talk) 01:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Comment. I'm leaning to keep, but need to know better before voting, there's some coverage in The Hindu, I found another in Italian and a few in Hebrew, but since I can't read either, some sort of vetting of the sources is needed. But given that it's covered in three countries, it looks notable. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 02:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete, per nom but only if other similar/identical NN websites from Category:File sharing communities are deleted as well. --Shuki (talk) 05:30, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment what's up with a brand-new user like User:Gottor starting a Wikipedia career with a series of AFDs.Historicist (talk) 00:27, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep I know nothing about this field, but a news google archives search certainly bears out the claim in the article that it is a new company that received coverage around the world last winter. I put some of the links to news articles in. Historicist (talk) 00:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep While I'm not fully convinced of the non-English sources yet, but the fact that they exist, and that the English source actually shows notability, I'm going with a keep for now. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 04:40, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Proxio

Proxio (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

No further sign of notability, no sources. ApprenticeFan talk contribs 13:55, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 04:25, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. No third-party sources presented, and all I can find on google is several hundred copies of the same press release. (Most hits for Proxio are for a different company.) No notability independent of its parent company Volvo, in whose article it doesn't merit a mention; and even a redirect would be improper, since there's at least two other companies named Proxio that are at least as notable. —Korath (Talk) 14:22, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Winchester White

Winchester White (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Non-notable, further evidence of finding reliable sources. ApprenticeFan talk contribs 13:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 15:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Delete - article is purely promotional and contains no encyclopedic information about the organization in question. . .Rcawsey (talk) 19:33, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Hercules Networks

Hercules Networks (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Corporation, not notable. I speedied previously and it has reappeared with a minor tweak or two. There is still nothing to establish that this is anything more than an unfunded startup with a handful of people, an idea, and no money. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:02, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete. Not notable.--Talain (talk) 22:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

The company has significant funding - though private, the revenue is such that we are a nationwide distributor. If you visit the corporate website, you'll see that there are partnerships with many notable corporations such as Target, AT&T, Six Flags, etc. As for the experience of staff, again, on the corporate site you will see that the staff has very notable people, with extensive background and experience. There have also been many outside sources that have reported on the company and its practices, including a Fox News interview. I am not sure what is required to meet the notability guideline, but what specifics there may be can likely be met. Simon311A (talk) 00:50, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

My reply is at User talk:Simon311A. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 03:03, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete - I don't see teh depth of coverage here that would clear the notability bar. -- Whpq (talk) 16:27, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


Here is a list of some of the external sources that have covered Hercules Networks:

Simon311A (talk) 04:20, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Comment - I'm really torn. On the one hand, these links show that this business meets the general notability guideline. On the other hand, I know from experience how easy it is for a startup to get this sort of coverage and how little fact checking is behind many of these articles. Most of these rags, you send them a press kit with some photos, a case study, and quotes from a customer, and they'll publish anything. You could almost tell them you've just patented the electric light bulb and have an exclusive contract with GE and they'd print it. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 05:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Point taken, but Vending Times for example, has been around since 1962 and had quite detailed coverage of Hercules Networks. As for fact verification, healthy revenue is hard to prove as it is private, but key partnerships with notable companies such as AT&T can be supported by the existence of branded machines - AT&T Machines Simon311A (talk) 13:41, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Simon311A (talk) 20:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:37, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] FORUM8

FORUM8 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Most content has no relevant source. One reference in other language. Most references to company site.  Cargoking  talk  18:43, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

References in Japanese don't really help.  Cargoking  talk  11:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Per WP:V, foreign language references are acceptable. English is preferred, but if only foreign is available, that is fine. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • He said they didn't help, not that they weren't allowed. I too have issues with things I can't read being used as sources. Is it really WP:V if I can't verify it? Niteshift36 (talk) 07:56, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Arguing that a source that you in particular can't read because it's in a language you can't read isn't verifiable is like arguing that a source you in particular can't read because it's in a magazine from the 1960's that hasn't been digitized yet isn't. And no, that's not a strawman argument, because I've seen editors argue just that, multiple times -- if it's not something they can read with a single click then it's not a real reference, according to them. Which blatently flies in the face of what WP:V actually says. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:19, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 05:32, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Speedy Delete as this article is pure spam. Aside from the issue of self-promotion, an extensive search for English language sources shows that Forum8 is the subject of self-published sources, but coverage manufactured by the company itself does not confer notability. The is no verifiable evidence to suggest that this company or its products meet the requirements of WP:CORP. --Gavin Collins (talk|contribs) 13:34, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • As someone who translates articles from foreign-language Wikipedias to English, I want to say that it's established custom and practice on Wikipedia that foreign-language sources are fine, provided they're reliable. Frankly, I don't want to see my hard-written material deleted just because the five or six editors at an AfD don't speak the language and can't figure out Google translate, so I want that to be clearly understood.

    Having said that, in this case Gavin.collins has the right of it, and I think the Japanese-language sources in this case do not establish notability. Delete.—S Marshall Talk/Cont 13:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Google Translate is not always accurate.  Cargoking  talk  14:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • That's true, it isn't. Always best to get someone who speaks the language to check.—S Marshall Talk/Cont 14:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Business Proposed deletions

Please hide this entire section when empty

[edit] Businesspeople

[edit] Clyde vanbarrel

Clyde vanbarrel (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Biography presenting no evidence of notability. Fails WP:BIO. Speedy deletion declined twice, so bringing it here. Astronaut (talk) 22:48, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Andrew Bentley (entrepreneur)

Andrew Bentley (entrepreneur) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

What was the name of that guy who was accepting payment in exchange for a Wikipedia article, later banned by Jimbo Wales? This looks like one of those promotional/peacocky articles about a non-notable that he would have written. Or some other ad agency. JBsupreme (talk) 07:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Comment: all the refs look like PR- "aboutus" page, the "prnewswire" site is where companies make press releases, "secinfo" while maybe candid encyclodedic material in some cases would be like a listing in the yellow pages unless perhaps cited in an unaffiliated filing (" our company considers the BioSubject to be a notable competitor" or etc). There is nothing AFAIK wrong with paid well-written pieces but it does take forever to remove puffery and peacock feathers and create a stark, balanced ( aka useful), fact based description. I guess this is what bothers me about the Darwin- there is a tendency for people to want to describe him as being politically correct while being unable to find any good points about Hitler. The personal benefit of writing an encyclopedia entry, or supporting science, is suspending opinion long enough to give yourself and honest shot at analysing data so you can later have better ( more agreement with reality ) opinions. I'm nerdseeksblonde and I endorsed this message LOL Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 09:49, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Yancey E. Lovelace

Yancey E. Lovelace (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Unsourced WP:BLP. No verifiable notability. Contested PROD by OE with no reason given and no improvement. Wperdue (talk) 00:36, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Shahzada khurram

Shahzada khurram (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

non notable individual - page appears to be purely to advertise him. speedy delete removed without explanation by anon editor. noq (talk) 18:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete, no real assertion of notability.-Binary TSO ??? 09:19, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, note that AFD notice has been removed by same anon editor Per Ardua (talk) 09:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. Completely non-notable. Has anyone else wondered why an IP editor can't nominate an AfD, but can remove prod's? Niteshift36 (talk) 14:32, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete - --Orange Mike | Talk 18:53, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- SpacemanSpiff (talk) 04:29, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Speedy Delete A7. No point letting this sit out there for long. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 04:30, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Salih (talk) 04:42, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Greg Mesaros

Greg Mesaros (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

I can't find evidence that he meets WP:People. I can't verify the claim about Purchasing Magazine to see if it helps, the 'seminal' book seems very non-notable, the Ohio thing seems pretty trivial as well (the 36 World-class finalists). I've edited it a bit so people might want to check earlier versions. Dougweller (talk) 18:07, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] M. Anthony Marlowe

M. Anthony Marlowe (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

The citations are self-published or adverts, the biography and author may be in violation of WP:COI, and requires significant rewrite for keeping. The author has repeatedly removed maintenance tags that indicate page issues and required improvements. A linked company information article, TMone, was deleted based on notability. TRL (talk) 15:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I am not the author of this article. Actually, I believe SusanBagel is the author. Furthermore, I deleted the maintenance tags because I worked on the problems with this page. If you have such a problem with this article, why don't YOU rewrite it? User:ICIntern —Preceding undated comment added 16:00, 8 July 2009 (UTC).

  • Delete Reads as a vanity article for someone who's notability doesn't seem defined and the rash of SPAs editing this article worries me. treelo radda 16:16, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Wow. Well, thanks ICIntern for editing our page. We appreciate the help, and know that any feedback is valuable. This article is still under construction. I started writing this page, with BillyBagel, as a class project about someone notable in our community, and we chose Marlowe because we are both business majors and he started a business from scratch at a very young age. We feel he is a good role model for people like us. We really don't understand why this article should be deleted, and a number of the issues that have been pointed out don't even really seem to apply. Any help improving this article is appreciated, as this is our first attempt at creating an article.SusanBagel
  • So this article is the result of a class project? Hm. treelo radda 17:06, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes, it is. Our professor wanted us to research young entrepreneurs, with a focus on their on-line presence. Instead of writing a boring paper about Marlowe, we thought we would try putting up a wikipedia article about him. You can contest our article but you cannot contest our integrity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SusanBagel (talk • contribs) 17:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC) --
  • That's good, we're here to discuss the future of the article, not the integrity of the editors involved. Even with that though, that article as it stands isn't passing notability on the face of it. Improve the article as you say you will and I'm sure if this person is notable then the article will be kept. treelo radda 17:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • In response to all the flags, we feel they are invalid for the following reasons:

Missing Citations—We have 9 citations with links as well as a further reading section Sources not from a third-party—All of our sources are from a third-party publication except for one which we found from the company website Neutrality—We wrote this article as unbiased as possible. This is just our first try at writing an article. If you find something that seems biased please let us know and we will be sure to fix it. Notability—As Susan mentioned earlier, Marlowe is a notable person in our community. He is also nationally recognized, see the awards section. Advertisement—I don’t know what we would be advertising Links from other articles—We did not add any links but we will work on it. Conflict of Interest and Autobiography—both claims are not valid seeing as we have no stake in the company and we are not Anthony Marlowe Self-Published Sources—As stated earlier our sources are from established news publications or are public information. We have not written anything ourselves. External Links—We don’t even know what this flag means.

We appreciate all the help and feedback with this article. We are new at this and it has been quite a learning experience. However, if you have concerns or decide to flag something please make it constructive and provide a specific explanation of what is wrong so we can remedy the situation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BillyBagel (talk • contribs) 17:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC) --BillyBagel (talk) 17:34, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


  • It was more of an accident really. As we said, it's our first attempt at this and we couldn't figure out how to keep the article from going live. We are using the under construction tag to inform people that we are still working on this article.--BillyBagel (talk) 15:57, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete - with no offense to the students working on it: this is just another non-notable local businessman, most of whom will never get an article in Wikipedia. Why not work on the articles on some of your underrecognized local writers like Ed Gorman or Mickey Zucker Reichert? --Orange Mike | Talk 17:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC) has spent many a happy weekend in Greater Coralville
  • Delete - references do not appear to show notability. Question: is it a coincidence that an article for the company which this person is the founder of, TMone, is being repeatedly recreated in spite of several speedy deletions for lack of notability (and recreated by different users, including somebody who appears to be closely affiliated with the company)? --bonadea contributions talk 20:14, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Yasmina Siadatan

Yasmina Siadatan (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Non-notable; most other contestants on 'The Apprentice' don't have their own articles; other than appearing on British television for a few weeks, no reason to have an article about this person Coal-fired power station (talk) 02:55, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep. Notable as winner of The Apprentice with significant press coverage (and all other winners do have their own article). I42 (talk) 22:13, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep per sources. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 00:08, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep per sources. Rather a surprising nom. Occuli (talk) 16:20, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Cary Kochman

Cary Kochman (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

I don't think UBS's "Co-Head of Mergers & Acquisitions for IBD Americas" is really notable enough for an article. Yes, he's been quoted by the WSJ once or twice, but I don't see any mainstream coverage of him specifically. See below. —Chowbok ☠ 21:21, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


  • This article should be kept, however more information on the subjects' newsworthy coverage should be added. He is head of Mergers and Acquisitions for the Americas for one of the worlds leading (and still standing) financial institutions UBS AG, and has been cited more often than is reflected in this article. It's not only the WSJ quoting him, but the Financial Times and other sources. As such, information about this person is relevant, especially in today's worldwide financial climate. --Kentcamp (talk) 01:55, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep - Being quoted a bunch of time does not establish notability. What is need is coverage in articles that are about the subject rather than quoting the subject. This is behind a pay wall but the Chicago Tribune thinks it significant enough to note his career move. This article establishes the subject as a key hiring. And CBS Marketwatch also took note of him taking on his position at UBS. -- Whpq (talk) 19:36, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep I've changed my mind upon reading Whpq's links.—Chowbok ☠ 20:29, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Rufino Pablo Baggio

Rufino Pablo Baggio (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Appears to fail WP:BIO. Limited number of Ghits and GNEWS hits. ttonyb1 (talk) 22:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:59, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
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. (X! · talk)  · @835  ·  19:02, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Tony McLaughlin

Tony McLaughlin (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Not a single scrap of evidence that supports notability or importance. No references offered. magnius (talk) 15:38, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- I'mperator 18:17, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non notable - despite the age of the article, speedy A7 probably applies. Note also that the original author blanked the article at one point, this was reverted, and then it was instead significantly shortened. Speedy G7 may also apply. I42 (talk) 19:02, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. NN "entrepreneur" who dabbles in softcore porn. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 19:13, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Per nom. Parkerparked (talk) 19:32, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Pure self-promotion. Wikipedia is not the yellow pages (we're more the white pages, IMHO). BusterD (talk) 13:15, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
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.

[edit] David Corbin

David Corbin (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

He runs investment funds totaling $80 million (in 2001) according to BusinessWeek. God knows what they're worth now, but even the 2001 sum doesn't seem like a lot. Ghits few and rather generic. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:25, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 00:08, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. Article is pretty much promotional, feels like the guy is tooting his own horn. Smells like WP:COI. Not much in ghits, and David Corbin could seemingly be anybody. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 05:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Hans Hassle

Hans Hassle (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Seems to fail notability guidelines generally, though the subject was at one time appointed to a Board by the Swedish government. A lack of independent reliable sources is an indication subject lacks true encyclopedic notability. Also note some coatracking of information about his writings and projects.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Martin Tobias

Martin Tobias (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Non-notable small-scale investor and self promoter, so fails to meet WP:N. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiJeffMa (talk • contribs) — WikiJeffMa (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

  • Strong Keep I agree that the article is poorly sourced and needs desperate work. But a wealth of good sources exist, and the article could be easily cleaned up--and I don't think comes close to a candidate for deletion. google news archive search shows a wealth of articles in high-profile publications, including some written about him in depth: [12] in BusinessWeek. Articles cover him in all different regards, as CEO of Imperial Renewables: [13], others discuss him as an investor, his ability to raise funds: [14]. This is above and beyond what is required to establish notability: detailed coverage in multiple reliable sources, found with very little effort. Cazort (talk) 20:18, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment One source not listed is http://cleantech.com/news/2238/martin-tobias-out-at-imperium (perhaps not surprisingly). This would seem to support notability, although probably not in the way the creator of the article intended. There's likely to be more like this out there, if anyone cares to dig. I might do a bit more tomorrow when I get back home. Peridon (talk) 21:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I agree with the sentiment, in my scan of the sources I found, there was negative coverage too. I think it is important to incorporate this sort of material into the article as well...NPOV means presenting all perspectives that have substantial coverage in reliable sources. Cazort (talk) 02:05, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 00:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] James Geiss

James Geiss (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

This article is unreferenced and a possible hoax. Google returns no references to a James Geiss associated with whaling, except for Wikipedia mirrors ([15]). Google Scholar ([16]) and Google News also turn up no mentions of this person. I've also been unable to find any references in Factiva to substantiate any of the article contents. His mention in the Whaling article was added by a SPA with no other edits (diff). Suggest deletion as either a hoax or a person who doesn't meet WP's notability guidelines. Muchness (talk) 06:25, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Note Bumped into this while looking into the suspected hoax tag on [Bjorn Sigurdsson]. That discussion and this one may end up being related...? Commentors might want to glance at the (small) discussion running on that article's talk page as well; maybe someone can shed light on both at once. Coanda-1910 (talk) 05:34, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete as hoax. Edward321 (talk) 03:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 04:35, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete/Transwiki The nominator is correct that google is only able to find reference to this name in wikipedia mirrors, but that in itself isn't evidence of a hoax. Regardless, there are no citations or evidence that the individual existed so it should be either deleted until references can be found, or transwikied to the creators sandbox. -Markeer 12:46, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete This article has no references at all and apparently no one can verify that James Geiss even existed. I looked up one of the references listed in the Bjorn Sigurdsson article and discuss what I found on that article's talk page. I couldn't find Geiss in the book's index or in the relevant chapter of the book. I doubt he even existed.-Schnurrbart (talk) 03:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Looks like a hoax, and a long-lived one at that. It lasted just over 3 years before it was caught. I think that might qualify it for the list of notable hoaxes - it'd be towards the top. - Bootstoots (talk) 19:37, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Michael M. Sears

Michael M. Sears (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

WP:BLP concerns; does not appear to readily meet WP:N. Entire notability appears to be tied into one event so WP:BLP1E is also a factor and concern. Being an executive at 1-2 corporations or 1-2 divisions of a corporation is not evidence of notability in any way, shape, or form, either. There are thousands of such corporations and divisions. Delete per WP:BLP, WP:BLP1E, and WP:N considerations. rootology (C)(T) 20:06, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:38, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] James Fairchild (transport)

The result was delete. The actual discussion has been hidden from view for privacy reasons but can still be accessed by following the "history" link at the top of the page. 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..

{{subst:empty template|This template must be substituted. Replace {{Courtesy blanked}} with {{subst:Courtesy blanked}}.}}

This page has been blanked as a courtesy.

[edit] Businesspeople Proposed deletion

for occasional archiving

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Business"
Personal tools
Visit joltnews for the latest headlines
Visit bloit.com for company information
Geed Media does computer consulting on long island.
This page viewed times. See Logs