Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MCAP (company)


 * 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. S warm  ♠  23:22, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

MCAP (company)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of notability, only one reference to their own website, tagged for notability for 5 years. Theroadislong (talk) 22:40, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:19, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:19, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:19, 11 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - Classic questionable material as this is almost even speedy material and the best I found were only several press releases and passing mentions at News, Books, browsers and Highbeam. SwisterTwister  talk  03:42, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. No RS sources provided or to be found to suggest that subject is notable. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 19:32, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack coverage in independent reliable sources, fails WP:GNG fails WP:CORP. Searching was complicated a bit by the fact that MCAP is a commonly used abbreviation for "market capitalization". I found a couple of detailed article in a trade publication "MCAP Value-Flex – Mortgage of the Year" and MCAP’s Fusion is Here, directory listings like this, recycled press releases like this and this, and blogged reviews/complaints like the blacklisted complaintsboard.com/bycompany/mcap-mortgage-services-a17060.html and these.  Its claim to notability would be as Canada's second largest mortgage company; however lack of in-depth coverage in multiple independent reliable sources is a bar.  --Bejnar (talk) 19:20, 18 December 2015 (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.