Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Capstone Associated Services


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:17, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Capstone Associated Services

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject fails WP:NOTABILITY for WP:CORP. Has some links but trivial coverage or mentions, business listings and pr anouncements and reprints fail WP:CORPDEPTH. Was speedied deleted previously under Capstone Associated as spam. Lacks "significant coverage in independent reliable sources" WP:GNG Hu12 (talk) 19:56, 24 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 23:30, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:GNG and WP:N.  The article is sourced with a variety of sources.  These are not trivial coverage, which is a term that has a specific meaning under our guidelines.  The listing on investing.businessweek is from a source that cannot afford to be less than reliable.  Unscintillating (talk) 17:56, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It's a directory listing. How reliable the source is irrelevant. --Calton | Talk 11:16, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Its an unacceptable source and Fails WP:CORPDEPTH--Hu12 (talk) 17:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Per nom; snowjob about the meaning of "trivial coverage" notwithstanding, it doesn't have actual significant coverage. --Calton | Talk 11:16, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 27 January 2013 (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.