Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Makosi Consulting


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 03:22, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Makosi Consulting

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Likely to fail WP:NCORP. KH-1 (talk) 01:49, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. KH-1 (talk) 01:49, 3 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep. Why would you want to delete this page instead of helping improve it??? Is this how we are going to grow pages and the movement??
 * Valid and reliable sources has been provided here, the company has wonawards in America and ranked highly.
 * This page must stay!! There are worse pages that this under you runny noses.. But You doing fokol. Please — Preceding unsigned comment added by MollelwaFahaSaBasotho (talk • contribs) 06:01, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * There is nothing useful about the sources, see below. Oaktree b (talk) 12:50, 10 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and New York.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:48, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:34, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Source Evaluation Table. I have attempted a source evaluation table for the sources in the article, and another source I found (Institute of Chartered Accountants of Zimbabwe, 1 May 2022 Newsletter).  Does anyone have an opinion on how independent the in-depth articles in the trade journals Accountancy SA and The Silicon Review are likely to have been? -- Toddy1 (talk) 16:57, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the source analysis. I'd say the AccountingSA piece is an advertorial, and The Silicon Review is primarily an interview. Neither source contributes towards GNG.-KH-1 (talk) 03:40, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete per source table above, not much of anything else found for sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 12:49, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

-- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 06:31, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: not notable per source analysis above + my own ref check. FYI, Silicon Review is pay-to-play and therefore not independent.


 * 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.