Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kynetx


 * 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. Appears to meet WP:ORG; WP:SIGCOV demonstrated. WP:AFDISNTCLEANUP. (non-admin closure) LlamaAl (talk) 00:14, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Kynetx

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Spammy, unsourced, no evidence of notability. Of the several refs provided, they're self-published, dead or don't appear to mention the article subject anywhere near the notability standard required.

Also this field is broadly my day job, yet I still can't understand from this article what on earth they're selling. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:51, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - The article needs some rewriting, but the company seems notable. I was able to find 10 newspaper articles on NewsBank, some of which provide in depth coverage. I also found 30 newspaper articles and articles in three different magazines on HighBeam. Seems to meet WP:ORG. - MrX 19:25, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 23:37, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LlamaAl (talk) 00:05, 10 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. Bad article is bad, but the subject appears to be notable. Andrew327 17:41, 13 February 2013 (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.