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.Michig (
talk) 08:36, 28 December 2015 (UTC)reply
I noticed this instantly after
DGG (who also coincidentally tagged it from July 2013) deleted and added again this article and, as I concur it seems questionably notable and improvable, I have nominated it myself. My searches found nothing better than a few passing mentions with "Zaarly company" at News, Books, browsers and Highbeam but certainly nothing to suggest a better notable article yet. Notifying past AfDers
Bonadea,
AllyD and
Ceyockey.
SwisterTwistertalk 07:38, 21 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete. there are many of these articles from earlier years that need review. The most recent item other than a mention I can find is
[1], from the Denver Post, but Iconsider it a press release. DGG (
talk ) 07:58, 21 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete - little to no significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Citobun (
talk) 08:07, 21 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete - per nom and above comments.
CatcherStormtalk 08:33, 21 December 2015 (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.