Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peterson's Lab

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. Sandstein 09:00, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Peterson's Lab

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

Non-notable company with citations to press releases. The three Chinese references are basically identical company descriptions that appear to be directory entries. I couldn't find coverage as required by WP:CORPDEPTH, although I may not be interpreting foreign-language sources properly. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:54, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 04:33, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 04:33, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 04:34, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

keep;It has a good source. Qipamenghuan (talk) 19:19, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Qipamenghuan: Where? I haven't seen a good source. Would you, as the author of the article, please point it out, and explain why it's a good source? Bear in mind that we need multiple good sources that are independent. The Chinese ones are all nearly identical, and the English one is a press release (written by the company) so it isn't a good source. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:58, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
delete doesn't pass notability. Natureium (talk) 15:50, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, lacks substantial third-party coverage. Rentier (talk) 09:53, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:50, 9 December 2017 (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.