Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/InformaCast

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 Keep. (non-admin closure) Jim Carter (from public cyber) 09:14, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

InformaCast

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

No assertion of notability, and no references supporting such an assertion. ubiquity (talk) 16:18, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:08, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:09, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (babble) @ 16:20, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Notability established by [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. Please research notability WP:BEFORE nominating. ~KvnG 23:37, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources found by KvnG - Passes GNG. –Davey2010 • (talk) 00:33, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep ~~Incubate~~ Topic satisfies WP:GNG and is "worthy of notice" (WP:N). The article was created without WP:V sourcing. The fact that the time of the deletion nomination is within 26 minutes of article creation, that the nomination mis-ascribes content problems to WP:N, and that the nomination does not show evidence of the steps to be taken WP:BEFORE nominating, doesn't change the fact that readers cannot verify the article content. Unscintillating (talk) 14:23, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Changing to keep, as an editor added references to the article. Unscintillating (talk) 22:18, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:39, 20 September 2014 (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.