Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fox Learning Systems: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
SiobhanHansa (talk | contribs) →Fox Learning Systems: It's not that the Pit. Gaz is unreliable - it's that coverage generally needs to be more than local to meet notability |
|||
Line 25:
*'''Keep''' They have provided sufficient sitations to prove they are a note worthy company. They produce a widely distributed product. They are a multifacited company that works with/for large corporations. They perform their own studies which are sited in industry publications, and which their unique findings are used by other industries and companies. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/67.186.28.104|67.186.28.104]] ([[User talk:67.186.28.104|talk]]) 03:17, 11 November 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
*'''Merge/Redirect''' to [[Debra Fox]]. There seems to be a lot of ad-speak at this moment, but with or without it, I don't see the company's notability. Having a laundry list of notable clients doesn't make a business notable itself. --[[User:CliffC|CliffC]] ([[User talk:CliffC|talk]]) 17:19, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
'''Keep''' This company is notable in the elder-care industry. Not every business on wikipedia has worldwide exposure. The question should be "is the business notable in a certain industry?" The answer for Fox Learning Systems is YES! If you were familiar with the LTC industry, there would be no question as to the notability of this company. Moreover, the Post Gazette is a legitimate enough source to justify wikipedia's legitimacy requirments. The notion that it needs to be in a "national paper", of which there are only about 5, is completely ridiculous. I know there are not any requirements set in stone for what a reliable source is, but lets use common sense. The Post Gazette is the main newspaper for the Pittsburgh region, with over 400,000 readers on weekdays and over 600,000 on Sundays. Plus their website gets a significant number of hits. [[User:Theovoice|Theovoice]] ([[User talk:Theovoice|talk]]) 21:15, 12 November 2008 (UTC)<small>— [[User:Theovoice|Theovoice]] ([[User talk:Theovoice|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Theovoice|contribs]]) has made [[Wikipedia:Single purpose account|few or no other edits]] outside this topic. {{ #if: | The preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment was added at {{{2}}} (UTC).}}</small>
:The issue I have with the post-gazette isn't about whether it's a reliable source but about whether it helps meet our [[WP:ORG|notability guidelines]] which says coverage should not simply be local. A Pittsburgh company whose newspaper coverage is only in Pittsburgh newspapers - that's looks like local coverage to me. The rest of what you say about the company may well be true - sources that verify it would be great. So far though we have local newspapers and studies by people connected with the company, press releases and a puff piece. -- [[User_Talk:SiobhanHansa|SiobhanHansa]] 00:39, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
| |||