Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GeoResonance

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. postdlf (talk) 17:02, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GeoResonance

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. Only information in the company is own web-site and a few news articles they appeared in for making a claim that doesn't rise to the level of notability in and of itself. Sockatume (talk) 15:21, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This company get mentioned a whole bunch of times in relation to Malaysia Airlines Flight 370. Disregarding references which deal with MH370 leaves virtually no mentions; hence, I think this arguably a WP:BLP1E type situation. NickCT (talk) 16:46, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:45, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:45, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:48, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam ^Sing! 07:34, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I'm inclined to agree with NickCT. Coverage of this company seems to revolve around the coverage of the missing Malaysia Airlines flight. (Though WP:BLP1E isn't exactly relevant since that pertains to biographies of living persons) Notability is not temporary. When the coverage of the Malaysia flight died down, as it has, coverage of this company died down as well. --ceradon (talk • contribs) 08:27, 18 February 2015 (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.