Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qualitest Group


 * 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. Randykitty (talk) 09:42, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Qualitest Group

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested PROD. I could not find any sources to support notability. The ones in the article are mostly primary or are not WP:RSes. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:29, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete. Some passing mentions, like this dutch article that says Qualitest is one of the largest test companies in the international ICT market.  But unable to find any significant, indy references to show company notability.  -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 08:28, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. I worked to update the page with more "reputable" references - I do believe that analyst firms like Gartner would be considered reputable, right? As a third party who has used qualitest in the past, i believe that qualitest has some unique contribution to provide to the market, and as such, i worked to display that. - contributor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lewissall1 (talk • contribs) 18:44, 23 July 2015‎ (UTC)
 * Keep. I believe that the Wikipedia guidelines for references should be reviewed. Even though QualiTest is not mentioned on "google news" or "books", that doesn't mean that QualiTest is not mentioned by reputable sources, such as Gartner, Forrester, Ovum, and other reputable market leaders of technology research firms. Just the fact of being worthy of mention by these sources implies that they are relevant to have a page on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lewissall1 (talk • contribs) 20:08, 29 July 2015 (UTC) Lewissall1: You made your statement here already. . Sorry.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:37, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:37, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:37, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:37, 24 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - My searches found nothing to suggest better improvement and notability with the best results here and here. SwisterTwister   talk  05:34, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, S warm   we ♥ our hive  07:13, 31 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - Only source listed that would be viable for Notability is Gartner (although thats a stretch based on my experience of how as a tech company you can get in their reviews). There are no others I can find, they mostly seem to be PR generated. So fails WP:GNG Paul    Bradbury  14:55, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95  Talk  13:30, 7 August 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.