Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I-Access Investors


 * 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. After three relistings, this is all the commentary we are likely to get. This is a WP:Soft delete; the article may be recreated or usefied by any administrator upon request. MelanieN (talk) 00:50, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

I-Access Investors

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. Essentially all the refs are to mere listings or their own site. The google translation of the Apple daily site shows it to be a promotional interview.  DGG ( talk ) 16:36, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:25, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:25, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete at best because my searches noticeably found nothing better and none of this better satisfies the applicable notability. SwisterTwister   talk  18:47, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. I think they're probably notable for their cut-throat broker's premiums as documented by these sources - archive of 2010 newspaper article; video news 2011 of their system crash; 2012 newspaper article; article on their system crash in 2015. I've added their Chinese name to the "find sources" template above for editors who want to investigate further. Deryck C. 21:19, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 13:54, 24 February 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:46, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - I wonder if and  would consider drafting and userfying this if no one else comments.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:23, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. In the absence of proper  sources, there's no point in userifying.  DGG ( talk ) 16:03, 15 March 2016 (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.