Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Versomina


 * 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  01:40, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Versomina

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Article of a non-notable organization, created out of bad faith with libelous statements and use of blogs and forums as sources. Starczamora (talk) 22:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Haven't heard of that firm; the author probably made it out of frustration or something... Blake Gripling (talk) 23:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - I have heard of this company and of its shady practices but there's no reliable sources covering this company that I know of. So delete especially since it contains unreferenced negative statements. (If this were a BLP, it would've been speedy deleted.) --seav (talk) 01:10, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not notable; first time I've heard of this company, the sources are not mainstream, plus the numerous name changes further put this entry in doubt. The article mostly focused on the lawsuits instead of its finer points. --Eaglestorm (talk) 02:12, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - may violate WP:COI. &mdash; •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ•  Speak!  02:54, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom. Afterboth (talk) 12:34, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:COATRACK do we even know what this company does besides these allegations? no. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:56, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep On the contrary, this company has been allegedly harassing and duping its current and former employees for nearly a decade. There is considerable online sentiment against the company already. This article is notable. CameronDouglas (talk) 17:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep It has plenty of references, and nothing was made that wasn't in a proper encyclopedic manner. Dream Focus (talk) 15:38, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Attack article based from online stuff?? Any one with a thing against a company can put anonymous stuff on blogs all day, it does not make notability. RetroS1mone   talk  15:53, 9 February 2009 (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.