Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FaceVsion


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure)  TheSpecialUser TSU 00:43, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

FaceVsion

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Not notable. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:01, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * • Gene93k (talk) 01:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * • Gene93k (talk) 01:23, 13 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. I added a reference. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:39, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete How is a defunct, non-entity as a company noteworthy? The word "was" proliferates around the supposition of it's status.  The article now linked dates from 2011 & has no text in it.  Concur with WP:NN. Яεñ99 (talk) 04:31, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. Being defunct is not grounds for deletion. Once notable, always notable. Note that Wikipedia has an article about the Roman Empire. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:10, 14 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep – Notable. See WP:GNG.
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 03:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 03:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 03:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 03:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 03:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. Notability is not temporary, and the WP:JNN nomination is straight out of WP:ATA. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:28, 16 August 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.