Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brightstar partners


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 05:50, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Brightstar partners

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I do not believe this company has the sort of in-depth coverage required to meet WP:CORP. This was actually an uncontested PROD: however, the reason supplied for PRODing it was "irrelevance to the public," which is not a valid deletion reason, and so I felt compelled to de-PROD and send it here. Vanamonde (talk) 09:16, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete or Merge and REDIRECT to Avnet. Definitely not notable, but since it was acquired by Avnet in 2012 it would be reasonable to mention it there, merging in whatever can be properly sourced.  Not currently in Avnet, but Avnet is already tagged as incomplete. MB 04:38, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:07, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:51, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete: A WP:SPA article on a consultancy firm. I am seeing nothing more significant than fastest-growing lists and then routine coverage at the point when the firm was taken over; no evidence provided or found to indicate that it ever met WP:CORPDEPTH, or WP:GNG. AllyD (talk) 18:56, 28 January 2017 (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.