Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PhoneFactor


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Mediran ( t  •  c ) 01:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

PhoneFactor

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Tagged for notability since 2011 - lets make a choice. CorporateM (Talk) 07:13, 18 April 2013 (UTC) CorporateM (Talk) 07:13, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:32, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:32, 18 April 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran ( t  •  c ) 00:33, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm willing to say keep, because the links seem sufficient to me to establish notability. New York Times and Bloomberg Businessweek are both major mainstream sources with editorial oversight, and there are other good sources on the page as well.  I'm not sure if the original question of notability was added before adequate sourcing, but it probably needs to be reviewed.  May need a little bit of a rewrite to sound less like a glowing accolade, per WP:NPOV, but it's not spam and it does cover a notable topic.  Chri$topher  01:11, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Sources in the article do appear to show notability and the article does appear to meet WP:GNG. Half the sources don't, and the article does read like a borderline advertisement, but the subject is notable enough to warrant an article. - SudoGhost 06:17, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Notability clearly established by sources. Please consider evaluating and removing notability yourself next time. -—Kvng 13:07, 30 April 2013 (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.