Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centra biroji


 * 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.  Sandstein  10:38, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Centra biroji

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't indicate notability. Laun chba  ller  14:20, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment I think notability or otherwise may be difficult to establish since it doesn't look like there is much in English. There may be some coverage in Latvian so it would be handy if a Latvian speaker could comment.Acb314 (talk) 14:34, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latvia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:12, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:13, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Oh, cool, didn't know that what they offer is even legal. Not sure it even is much of a virtual office - they just offer to register or declare residence at their address and some legal and booking services. It looks to be small business venture to me. I am not certain though if they aren't important in the particular niche they are operating in Xil  (talk) 03:25, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm not sure what makes them notable, I read it more as an advert. (Might become a customer!) If the article had some additional references from the Latvian "Bizness" newspaper, Baltic Times, etc., I'd consider it more a reference article. Generally I'm for preserving any reasonable content regarding Central/Eastern/Baltic Europe, but someone would have to persuade me on this one. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 03:50, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 06:07, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero  &#124;  My Talk  05:42, 16 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete: Article contributed by a WP:SPA editor; the firm does not appear to have (or have had) an article on the Latvian Wikipedia; referenced only to a company listing page, the article text doesn't even make claim to be anything more than a firm going about its business on the page itself (other than the unquantified and unreferenced claim to be big and growing). Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 21:15, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * In which case wouldn't it qualify under WP:G5?-- Laun  chba  ller  23:20, 17 January 2014 (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.