Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fox Learning Systems: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m Signing comment by 70.89.229.25 - "→Fox Learning Systems: " |
|||
Line 28:
: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)
:I will put up some industry sources soon to put the issue of notability to rest. Please take a look at the following wiki and tell me how it meets notability if FLS doesn't. My opinion is both of these pages should be kept. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viv%C3%ADsimo Both of these companies are notable in a certain industry. I know nothing about Search Enterprise software field, but I can see from their sources, which are some press releases and other technological journals, that they are notable. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/70.89.229.25|70.89.229.25]] ([[User talk:70.89.229.25|talk]]) 14:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:The last comment was posted by me. I forgot to sign [[Special:Contributions/70.89.229.25|70.89.229.25]] ([[User talk:70.89.229.25|talk]]) 14:54, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
| |||