Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AVI Sound International


 * 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   no consensus. NW ( Talk ) 04:17, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

AVI Sound International

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

dePRODDED by article creator. This company does not meet WP:COMPANY at this time. While there are lots of web hits for product listings and the like, I can find no reliable, independent secondary sources. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:33, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * With all due respect to Joe's delete !vote, I would like to withdraw this AfD as there is no clear consensus to delete, even after two relistings. Also, there are several product reviews that I was not aware of at the time I nominated it.Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:16, 14 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  —Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:02, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this company. Joe Chill (talk) 17:22, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:29, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * keep: Did you try the website?. I have tidied the article up by removing the superfluous product listing, but have barely started on tracking down the various references. My plan, such as it is, is to add to the basic article as time permits, starting with links to press reviews. I am surprised and dismayed at some of the responses, and wondering if the many other small-scale speaker manufacturers on the list are subjected to the same barriers to entry. Howard Doctor (talk) 23:07, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I've listed it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Electronics. I certainly have no desire to delete a useful article and would be happy to withdraw if some other neutral and more knowledgeable editors think there's a reason to keep. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:44, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 02:40, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW ( Talk ) 01:54, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
 * 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.