Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Positions South Africa


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:29, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

National Positions South Africa

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not totable Notability, no content, unlikely to grow beyond a stub. NJR_ZA (talk) 16:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete A7. --BDD (talk) 20:00, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:57, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:57, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:57, 20 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Notability not even asserted. No reliable source coverage found in search. • Gene93k (talk) 15:00, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep I am busy getting References such as http://www.inc.com together and more information --Jcw69 (talk) 10:14, 22 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - If this is a sub-unit of National Positions USA, then per WP:ORG, it should be part of that article (which does not exist). Regardless, all I see are press release when I look for sources.  I do not accept simply being listed on Incs top 5000 whatever list to demonstrate notability and furthermore, I'll point out that the INcs ranking reference is 1360 and not 130 as stated in the article (typo?), but more importantly is about the company based out of Agoura Hills, CA which means the reference isn't even for the South African company. -- Whpq (talk) 21:29, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per Whpq. Should be merged into National Positions, but that article doesn't exist and the company appears not to be notable. The sourcing I can find is all publicity material and other minor listings that only show that the company exists, not that it's notable. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG on lack of significant coverage. --Batard0 (talk) 17:13, 26 October 2012 (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.