Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ciklum (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 03:03, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Ciklum
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Previously deleted, immediately re-created by the same WP:SPA,. Claim to notability is a placing in a list by Red Herring magazine, which is currently unverifiable as the pages are 404. Almost entirely the work of an agent of the company. Sources are largely not independent (i.e. repeats of press releases). Needs deletion or a complete rewrite with new sources, IMO. Guy (Help!) 23:15, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:35, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:35, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, no notability. Haakon (talk) 20:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete and salt as repeatedly re-created deleted page. This is an IT outsourcing company.  Inclusion on "top 100 business" lists is no claim of notability; creation of the list does not automatically confer notability on 100 otherwise unremarkable businesses. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:41, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Why wasn't is speedy deleted? Niteshift36 (talk) 02:12, 6 March 2010 (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.