- 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 no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 02:22, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Be2 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Notability has been questioned for more than two years and, at the present time, little or no can be found published about this company from verifiable and reliable third-party sources. The article appears to be more an advertisement created by a SPA than an independently authored encyclopedia article. Geoff Who, me? 00:36, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Theopolisme (talk) 23:47, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mkdwtalk 04:13, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 01:38, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - There are sources showing in the footnotes, including THIS from The Guardian. Administrators please note that the third relist is supposed to include a detailed rationale of why no call is being made. Carrite (talk) 23:32, 19 January 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.