Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DeHavilland – Political Intelligence & Parliamentary Monitoring

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. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:11, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DeHavilland – Political Intelligence & Parliamentary Monitoring

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

While the company's website confirms they exist, I can't find any independent discussion of them to indicate that they are notable (either WP:GNG or WP:CORP). Article was Prodded, but prod was removed by IP editor with no explanation. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:39, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:03, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No multiple independent RS discussion of the co over time. The recently added Zetter book Lobbying: The Art of Political Persuasion includes DeHavilland's name four times, plus once in the index, but has no discussion of the company. --Lexein (talk) 17:32, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Seems like a promotional article to me. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 15:43, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - agree with nom - fails WP:CORP. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 13:55, 14 January 2012 (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.