Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ABC Financial Services, Inc.


 * 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. Courcelles (talk) 02:00, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

ABC Financial Services, Inc.

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable company. Cited references include: None of these citations, nor any that could be found, indicate any particular notability. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:03, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) a piece in a Sports Club management magazine that appears largely promotional;
 * 2) a reference to the company's profile on the Bloomberg investing website that supposedly likens the company to MetroLink (which MetroLink is unspecified, but the only ones that can be found appear to be light rail transit operators) and Fortius One (an apparently non-notable company in its own right) -- but which reference does not mention either company;
 * 3) a reference to the International Health, Raquet and Sports Club Association website that purportedly list them as a "top supplier" (in fact it only lists them in a list of suppliers exhibiting at a particular convention); and
 * 4) a press release.
 * Delete - Sources are quite weak. Fails WP:CORP and WP:GNG.  Article was tagged for rescue without explanation by the article's creator, and the editor who tagged it hasn't even !voted here.  Tagging an article you created for rescue solely because you don't want it to be deleted is inappropriate.  I have deleted the rescue tag.  If the article's creator (or anyone else) would like to add the rescue tag to this article, please also include a brief comment here explaining why this item should be rescued and how that could happen (per the instructions at WP:ARS).    Snotty Wong   chatter 17:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry. I didn't know I had to give a reason for marking the article with . And I didn't know I as the article creator should vote or could vote. I suppose the  tag would be more appropriate. I wanted time to find additional sources, which I think there are. Thanks for you patience. Dcsm23 (talk) 20:53, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * has once again tagged the article for rescue, and I believe the action is no more appropriate now than it was the first time. hangon would not have been the appropriate choice either, as this is only for speedy deletion candidates. The proper action would be to express an opinion at this discussion as to why the article should be allowed to remain. This discussion will continue for 7 days, so there will be time to find the sources if they exist.  If the article improves during this discussion, it will probably survive this deletion discussion.  If it takes longer to find the sources, then the article (with improved sources) can be recreated later.  If (as I believe is likely or I would not have nominated in the first place) there are no better sources, then the article will be deleted as appropriate.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:00, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Dscm23, you are free to !vote in this AfD, and you have 7 days from the date of nomination (which was July 23rd) to find additional sources.   Snotty Wong   chatter 02:31, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Likeminas (talk) 20:18, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. This business produces proprietary software to assist health clubs in managing the member, employ, facility, and dues related aspects of their business.  As such it is one of many such firms, each of which fancies themselves an encyclopedia subject without sufficient reason, and this article makes absolutely no case that this business or its products have any long-term historical notability or cultural, historical, or technical significance. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 20:05, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and Smerdis of Tlön. Peridon (talk) 10:47, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: no indication for notability.  Dewritech (talk)  18:35, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete so thoroughly non-notable that I wondered about the "rescue" template till I saw it had been put on by the article creator  DGG ( talk ) 00:21, 28 July 2010 (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.