Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OnForce Solar

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 speedy keep per WP:SK#1. Nomination withdrawn with no outstanding delete !votes. (Non-administrator closure.) Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:28, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OnForce Solar

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

~~This is promotional article, without any references.~~ ~~There are no reliable sources, even the company's own website is down at the moment.~~ Vanjagenije (talk) 21:57, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

keep I had already removed the promotional content when the nom was placed, minutes after I declined a speedy tag. I have already added one cite to a major newspaper article. I find it hard to belive that the nominator had time to comply with WP:BEFORE. Tell me, Vanjagenije, what efforts did you make to source this before rushing to AfD? DES ^(talk) 22:05, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sorry, I rushed it. I want to revoke the nomination. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:10, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Very well, Vanjagenije, it is easy to get in too much of a hurry here. If you want to withdraw, then ~~strike~~ your nominating statement, and some 3rd party will close this as withdrawn. That is no bar to a later nomination if you or any editor think it doesn't belong for whatever reason. DES ^(talk) 22:14, 5 February 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.