Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Truehope

Truehope

Truehope (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)

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

Company is not notable, reads somewhat like WP:G11 The Determinator p t c 00:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

• Keep Meets GNG as there are reliable sources, although the article is somewhat adverty. Electriccatfish2 (talk) 00:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
• Keep The company lost their constitutional fight in Canada's Supreme Court. Their fight against the Canadian government to market their products continuesdrtap4 (talk) 10.00, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Comment - Please support your keep Vote! with a valid Wikipedia based reason. Because the, "company [was] blamed for death of patient" is not a valid reason. Please see WP:ORG. reddogsix (talk) 20:21, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

• Delete Non-notable company lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. References are trivial in nature. The reliable sources mentioned in the "keep" comment are only passing mentions of the company. reddogsix (talk) 01:06, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

• Keep Public needs to be warned about this companydigitel9598 (talk)(UTC) --Digitel9598 (talk) 21:01, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Comment - Please provide a valid reason for keeping the article. Wikipedia is not a soapbox or a warning system. reddogsix (talk) 22:43, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No sources indicating notability returned via Google web or news searches. None of the references in the article establish notability. MisterUnit (talk) 14:57, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

• Delete Not notable enough as per other comments, and as per when this article was deleted 6 months ago.[1] It has not become more notable in only 6 months. —Thempp (talk) 20:18, 10 July 2012 (UTC)