Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New American Funding


 * 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--Ymblanter (talk) 11:09, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

New American Funding

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Enough indication of notability to pass speedy A7, but I don;t think there is actual notability. Inclusion on a "fastest growing" list tends to mean "not yet notable", and the other awards are similarly minor. The sources are primarily local, the sort that will celebrate any local enterprise, and are there undiscriminating. The only really reliable on is Inc., but they merely included the company name on a list there, which is not substantial coverage.  DGG ( talk ) 16:14, 3 September 2014 (UTC).  DGG ( talk ) 16:14, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:28, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:28, 6 September 2014 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Rcsprinter123    (consult)  @ 16:30, 11 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:CORP. I could find no independent coverage in a search, just press releases and blogs. Even a reference in the article that looked like it was from the New York Times was actually a press release. The awards are minor and some of them are suspect (we don't know what criteria Inc. used to name the biggest job creators in California, but their results seem so out of line with expectations that I don't give them any credence). --MelanieN (talk) 01:33, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:CORP and lacks significant coverage in independent reliable sources covering it.-- danntm T C 17:52, 15 September 2014 (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.