Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/16 Symbols


 * 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. Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:34, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

16 Symbols

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable company. References amount to an article written by the company's CEO (but not an article actually about the company), and a self-published Crunchbase listing. Speedy deletion removed by brand new editor. (I smell a sock, but that's a matter for a different venue.) WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:49, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

I agree the article needs some edits but i think deletion would not be appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jstdit (talk • contribs) 19:52, 13 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- Finngall   talk  19:58, 13 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. I found no news coverage in English.  -- Finngall   talk  20:05, 13 May 2014 (UTC)


 * It has coverage in English. Kindly check the references. user:jstdit — Preceding undated comment added 23:35, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment As has been pointed out before, the references are not reliable sources and do not establish notability. Jstdit is strongly urged to read the policy about reliable sources.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:01, 14 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Does not seem to pass WP:ORG, no evidence of notability.-- &#9790;Loriendrew&#9789;  &#9743;(talk)  02:04, 14 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- Finngall   talk  03:44, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Supplied sources fail certainly WP:CORPDEPTH. Dolescum (talk) 02:23, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

It is a notable Company with 3rd party sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.172.134.218 (talk) 19:19, 16 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment @110.172.134.218: Please enlighten us as to which of the sources listed complies with Wikipedia's guidelines for reliable sources. None of the sources on the article do, as far as I can tell, but I'd be interested in being proven wrong if you have specific points to make. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * 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.