Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greenfield Advisors: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Relisting debate |
Perchloric (talk | contribs) →Greenfield Advisors: delete |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
<hr style="width:55%;" /> |
<hr style="width:55%;" /> |
||
:<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''[[WP:RELIST|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, <font color="green">[[User:MacMed|'''MacMed''']]</font><sup><font color="red">[[User talk:MacMed|talk]]</font></sup><sub><font color="black">[[Special:Contributions/MacMed|stalk]]</font></sub> 22:17, 8 April 2011 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|{{SUBPAGENAME}}]] |
:<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''[[WP:RELIST|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, <font color="green">[[User:MacMed|'''MacMed''']]</font><sup><font color="red">[[User talk:MacMed|talk]]</font></sup><sub><font color="black">[[Special:Contributions/MacMed|stalk]]</font></sub> 22:17, 8 April 2011 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|{{SUBPAGENAME}}]] |
||
*'''Delete''' As noted above, there is no indication of notability, neither in the sources cited nor in the results of a Gnews search. [[User:Perchloric|Perchloric]] ([[User talk:Perchloric|talk]]) 02:23, 10 April 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 02:23, 10 April 2011
- Greenfield Advisors (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I don't see how this meets WP:COMPANY. Wikipedia is not the Yellow Pages. bender235 (talk) 14:00, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:01, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- Keep Could use a couple more references, but I think ref #3 in particular goes to notability, and if the Mundy article is merged in, #2 should also, if it doesn't already. Monty845 18:10, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Article is about a real estate and business consulting firm. The references are to appraisal business journals with small, specialized readerships. The chief claim to fame here seems to be the business's associations with notable events like the Exxon Valdez spill. That still does not establish that this firm itself had a significiant effect on history, culture, or the field. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 20:26, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- Keep - If correctly sourced, the article could stand up. Eduemoni↑talk↓ 21:51, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, MacMedtalkstalk 22:17, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
- Delete As noted above, there is no indication of notability, neither in the sources cited nor in the results of a Gnews search. Perchloric (talk) 02:23, 10 April 2011 (UTC)