375:- I agree, no assertion of notability is in this article, and no secondary sources are presented which assert the company's notability. However, I am uncomfortable voting delete for an article that was only created 7 hours earlier, as that seems to contradict the assumption of good faith (though if proof can be given that this was a SPA, I'm all in favour of permablocking the user or IP address). At the same time, the creator has now had almost a week to provide references, and hasn't done so.
337:
My nomination gives a link to the guideline, and notes that the article fails to meet it which is a pretty typical reason for a trip to AfD, regardless of how many words are used to express it. Your opinion entirely fails to address the issues raised by that nomination. Feel free to include "I reject
342:
guideline and the need for companies to have been featured in multiple non-trivial coverage in reliable, independent sources" in your opinion so the closing admin has a better idea of where you're coming from. If you disagree with :CORP, you're disagreeing with a hell of a lot more people than just
327:
I find it amusing that you criticise the detail I gave, when your nomination consists of 3 words and a link. I also find it amusing that you take offence at my italicising when you yourself did it in your reply to me. Whether something like this is worthy of an article is subjective, and I resent
305:
No, the closing admin should ignore opinions such as "Seems notable enough" that neither state nor even hint at why the subject in question is in any way notable. Process in these cases involves giving appropriate weight to such opinions, and if I'm inviting anyone to ignore policy in the above
306:
comment I'd be obliged if you'd point out where. The notability guidelines I refer to have been built over years with the input and discussion of many, many dedicated
Knowledge (XXG) contributors and I find your italicizing of the word guideline both insulting and vindicating.
52:
in article, nor did s/he add references during the week this was on AfD. (I would also note that this page has been speedied twice before, and any administrator coming to this after a subsequent recreation should seriously consider salting.
185:
I am the original creator of the page, I posted a comment in the discussion page before I found this page (sorry I'm new). Thank you for the constructive criticism, I'll dig up better links. I'm hoping to keep my first real page alive.
151:
115:
229:
88:
83:
92:
75:
169:
if 1) article can be expanded and revised beyond what I just did and 2) if more references can be added to better demonstrate notability. --
17:
171:
197:
It will help the closing administrator give weight to your opinion if you can demonstrate how the article satisfies the
392:
36:
376:
379:
359:
332:
322:
300:
287:
252:
239:
217:
190:
177:
161:
141:
57:
259:
You must be looking at a version of the article that contains multiple, independent non-trivial references that
79:
391:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
271:, I trust you will give appropriate weight to the keep opinions offered here thus far, i.e. pretty much zero.
71:
63:
187:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
339:
264:
198:
155:
123:
49:
48:. Company might be notable but creator failed to make any assertions of such consistent with
54:
355:
318:
283:
213:
137:
329:
297:
249:
109:
236:
158:
345:
308:
273:
203:
127:
328:
your attempts to discredit my !vote just because I disagree with you. —
292:
So the closing admin should ignore both process and policy to follow a
385:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
105:
101:
97:
154:
in independent media" (only press releases found) in
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
395:). No further edits should be made to this page.
343:me, and I'm happy to stand up for all of them.
8:
228:: This debate has been included in the
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
263:. Or you're completely ignoring
230:list of Utah-related deletions
1:
173:Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles
412:
380:18:49, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
360:14:59, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
333:14:49, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
323:13:34, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
301:12:45, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
288:10:16, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
253:08:07, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
248:, seems notable enough. —
240:12:31, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
218:14:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
191:14:35, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
178:02:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
162:01:48, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
142:23:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
58:21:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
388:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
377:AllGloryToTheHypnotoad
72:MultiLing Corporation
64:MultiLing Corporation
152:significant coverage
358:
321:
286:
242:
233:
216:
140:
403:
390:
354:
351:
348:
317:
314:
311:
282:
279:
276:
261:I just can't see
234:
224:
212:
209:
206:
176:
174:
136:
133:
130:
122:Appears to fail
113:
95:
34:
411:
410:
406:
405:
404:
402:
401:
400:
399:
393:deletion review
386:
349:
346:
312:
309:
277:
274:
237:John Vandenberg
207:
204:
172:
170:
131:
128:
86:
70:
67:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
409:
407:
398:
397:
382:
370:
369:
368:
367:
366:
365:
364:
363:
362:
256:
255:
243:
221:
220:
194:
193:
180:
164:
120:
119:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
408:
396:
394:
389:
383:
381:
378:
374:
371:
361:
357:
353:
352:
341:
336:
335:
334:
331:
326:
325:
324:
320:
316:
315:
304:
303:
302:
299:
295:
291:
290:
289:
285:
281:
280:
270:
269:Closing admin
266:
262:
258:
257:
254:
251:
247:
244:
241:
238:
231:
227:
223:
222:
219:
215:
211:
210:
200:
196:
195:
192:
189:
184:
181:
179:
175:
168:
165:
163:
160:
157:
153:
150:per lack of "
149:
146:
145:
144:
143:
139:
135:
134:
125:
117:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
56:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
387:
384:
372:
344:
307:
293:
272:
268:
260:
245:
225:
202:
188:Provotrumpet
182:
166:
147:
126:
121:
45:
43:
31:
28:
373:weak delete
296:. Gotcha. —
55:Daniel Case
201:criteria.
294:guideline
116:View log
340:WP:CORP
330:Xezbeth
298:Xezbeth
265:WP:CORP
250:Xezbeth
199:WP:CORP
156:WP:NOTE
124:WP:CORP
89:protect
84:history
50:WP:CORP
148:Delete
93:delete
46:delete
159:Corpx
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
356:talk
338:the
319:talk
284:talk
246:Keep
226:Note
214:talk
183:Keep
167:Keep
138:talk
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
347:Dei
310:Dei
275:Dei
235:--
232:.
205:Dei
129:Dei
114:– (
267:.
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
350:z
313:z
278:z
208:z
132:z
118:)
112:)
74:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.