Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of technology companies in Richmond, British Columbia


 * 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) 00:06, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

List of technology companies in Richmond, British Columbia

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I don't think that Wikipedia needs a list of companies in one city in Canada. It also appears that it fails WP:DIRECTORY because it focuses on one city. Joe Chill (talk) 15:00, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. The ref on the Talk page indicates that the city is home to several of the largest high-tech businesses in the province. Canuckle (talk) 03:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as a directory. There is no inclusion criteria and there the term 'technology' is vague, making it indistriminate. Most of the entries in the list are to multinationals which happen to have a branch office in the city. Arsenikk (talk)  15:53, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as this list topic list appears to have not been published anywhere else other than Wikipedia, as it does not have a verifiable definition and contravenes the prohibition on using Wikipedia to publish original research as illustrated by WP:MADEUP. If it has not be been published anywhere else, and there is no evidence that it is verifiable, let alone notable list topic, then there is no rationale for inclusion. To demonstrate that this topic was not created based on editor's own whim, a verifiable definition is needed to provide external validation.--Gavin Collins (talk|contribs) 08:31, 20 June 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.