- 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. Cirt (talk) 22:16, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- CorpNet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not yet notable on-line business service; asserts at best some importance via association with the founders of MyCorporation.com to which most reliable refs refer, but as it is a different company and the previous one has been bought by Intuit, merging there isn't really an option, either.Tikiwont (talk) 20:49, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 00:13, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete; yet another startup using Wikipedia for free publicity. The "references" supplied are mislabelled to mislead: the "Business Week" reference actually links to a referral page to a PRNet story. Evidence of a sophisticated spammer gaming the system, IMO. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:48, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: caught using irrelevant references. Note that 2 out of 3 references are for MyCorporation.com. Alexius08 (talk) 03:48, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, no evidence of notability. Nyttend (talk) 03:49, 12 November 2009 (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.