Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Undertone Networks
- 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 as per consensus - WP:CORP requirements are met. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Undertone Networks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Though the subject doesn't meet the notability requirements, although it fails WP:CORP and WP:ORG. ApprenticeFan talk contribs 23:06, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- I doubt any efforts would make this article more efficient than spam.keystoneridin! (talk) 23:12, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Passes WP:CORP per the Gnews link above. -SpacemanSpiffCalvin‡Hobbes 00:26, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per WP:BEFORE. The article can probably be expanded, with more than 100 GNews hits (excluding PR releases) to choose from. The nominator has not even attempted to rectify the problems before nominating the article. The company has received coverage in dozens of reliable sources. The fact that the article was not expanded is never a reason for deletion and the above delete-!voters do not even try to make a reasoning based on the available sources. Keystoneridin's !vote is particularly interesting here since I do not think it's spammy (then again, I rewrote it...). Regards SoWhy 20:48, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Delete Not convinced it passes WP:NOTABILITY Bradybd (talk) 05:42, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - the current references are sufficient to establish notability. Perhaps not by much but falls on the notable side for me. -- Whpq (talk) 16:32, 10 August 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.