Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Center for vein restoration


 * 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.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 01:10, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Center for vein restoration

 * – ( View AfD View log )

possibly qualifies for A7/G11, but I thought I would give it the benefit of the doubt of a more formal process.

One RS link, to a one paragraph link saying it won a reader-vote for "best vein care" by bethesda magazine.

Won "marcom" award, which is not notable enough to have a wiki page.

I personally vote speedy delete. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:00, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 20:47, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 20:48, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 20:48, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 20:49, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 20:49, 10 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete No significant news coverage found; awards claimed are not significant enough for notability. --MelanieN (talk) 01:39, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

comment note that this article by the same editor had previously been speedied under a slightly different title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaijin42 (talk • contribs)
 * Looks like it was actually deleted twice under that name (with capitalization). If the decision here is "delete", we might consider salting all versions of the name. --MelanieN (talk) 18:37, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete: I posted the original notability tag based on it being an early draft, though I was thinking proposing it for Speedy as Spam then.  Since it hasn't grown notable since, I'd say delete.  Bagheera (talk) 18:27, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete, sounds like an ad to me.LuciferWildCat (talk) 22:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete non-notable company, borderline spam RadioFan (talk) 03:51, 15 January 2012 (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.