Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quallion

Quallion

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

Written like an advertisement, contents copied from website, primary author seems to have conflict of interest. Either a complete rewrite or deletion is necessary. Hello71 (talk) 22:59, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It does require re-writing, but there are a lot of citations from real publications. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 13:31, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Notability seems almost non-existent. Sven Manguard Wha? 00:33, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:37, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Yet another world leader. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:24, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rewrite - Although poorly written, WP:ORGIN, states that Notable means "attracting notice." and it does not necessarily need to have "fame". Also, it has to have multiple reliable sources. Subject has attracted notice of Forbes Magazine [1], Financial Times [2], LA Times [3] as well as government agencies [4]. It satisfies WP:NCORP and I myself found plenty of articles ([5] [6], [7], [8], [9], [10] , [11]) that could improve the quality of this entry once notability has been established. HOWEVER, it is important do DELETE and cleanup all mentions of products that the company makes as it reads like an advertisement. On a semi-related note, I would suggest for us to do a cleanup of notability on some businesses in the "category:Companies of Brazil" as there are many shady unsourced companies in there in which the main sources are press releases and whose notability is questionable. -- Loukinho (talk) 19:44, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:22, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Keep it, burn it, I don't care — one could make a case either way... But for the love of Random Holy Deity, please despam this thing!!! Carrite (talk) 18:59, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The company is not notable. One article on it in Forbes does not make it notable, and the other sources are trade journals. Perchloric (talk) 23:20, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]