Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wilson Field Ltd


 * 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   Speedy delete per G7 (author blanked) by

Wilson Field Ltd

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Non-notable company. Cited references indicate that 1) they have a nice website; 2) they exist (they are listed in a business directory); 3) they have been short listed for some awards, but not actually won any. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:47, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree with above.  Not quite G11 material though. Syrthiss (talk) 14:57, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I do not think it is trying to promote the company and should be allowed as an article as it is describing the company, and Wikipedia is an encyclopedia whether a company is large or not. Why should large companies such as Tesco get to have a wikipedia page, and smaller companies do not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeckyCleary (talk • contribs) 15:26, 14 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Tesco has an article because there are 127 reliable sources from which to draw information. Please refer to WP:WHYNOT for an explanation on why not every company gets an article.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:28, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Insufficient evidence that this firm meets WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 17:15, 14 August 2012 (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.