Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sabella (company)


 * 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. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:34, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Sabella (company)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Promotional article for a company that has never yet produced a product. Only demos and press releases--and the refs, being essentially press releases, reflect that.  DGG ( talk ) 05:35, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * In the tidal energy industry this company is fairly notable, in that it has large scale (1MW and 2MW devices in development, admittedly according to their own information). I found the article useful when researching the sector, I would not like to see it deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.24.6 (talk) 08:24, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 13 April 2014 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:43, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Delete per nom - Non notable company. - →Davey 2010→ →Talk to me!→  15:54, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔  03:25, 29 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete  I don't see the sourcing that would show notability, but a note to 86.179... if you do see third-party sources about the company of the right type, we might be interested.  I looked and I didn't, doing hte usual sources and Highbeam (the best hit for Highbeam was a passing ref at, the rest were largely routine patent application notices.  --j⚛e deckertalk 23:22, 7 May 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.