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 no consensus. (Non-administrator closure.)
NorthAmerica1000 01:59, 6 April 2014 (UTC)reply
nonnotable financial company. in NASDAQ not NYSE. On of a group created by class, recreated after move to user space, despite advice that it was not likely to be notable. DGG (
talk ) 18:18, 13 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete. Unable to establish notability through
WP:GNG or
WP:ORG.
Cindy(
talk) 10:56, 15 March 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 15:59, 21 March 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, --
RoySmith(talk) 19:48, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment. Some possible sources not currently used in the WP article:
zacks.combenzinga.com found via
Marketwatch. I dont know if these change the outcome or not. I am not sure they are good sources. I figured it could not hurt to add them here though. Also isnt the Reuters profile a good source?
Reuters (currently used in the article). If none of these sources are reliable enough I think the rest of the coverage is incidental and thus probably fails
WP:ORGBeakermeep(
talk) 20:51, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep, agree with analysis by
VMS Mosaic, above. Cheers, — Cirt (
talk) 13:56, 1 April 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.