Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aversan inc.

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. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 11:33, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aversan inc.

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is not supported by sufficient reliable sources to show that the subject company is notable per WP:CORP. The references are either to press releases, or to articles that only mention this company in passing. NawlinWiki (talk) 17:38, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Lacks NPOV & very close to G11. Bazj (talk) 17:48, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article was revised and the PR reference taken out. It no longer contains language that is promotional of nature and therefore G11 no longer applies. Article is sourced by news articles from Wing Magzine, Canadian Business Aviation Association and others. osap21 12:53, 9 February 2015 (EST)
Also see deleted versions at Aversan Inc.; there's nothing usable there that isn't already here, though. Delete unless sources that aren't mere reprints of press releases are provided. Since osap21 was enthusiastic enough to create this article at least four times so far, I'm going to assume he already knows where to find them if they exist. —Cryptic 18:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Aversan Inc. is that this article is intended to be. Only ones created. The lower-case "i" in inc. was a type and this Aversan inc. article is supposed to be the Aversan Inc. one. I understand Cryptic's thought. However, not re-creating just because it was deleted. If approved was going to move the Aversan inc. to be the Aversan Inc.. Also, sources are completely seperate articles and are not reprints of press releases provided earlier. osap21 13:26, 9 February 2015 (EST)
- Current ref 1 is the closest to being usable, and it contains zero complete sentences about Aversan. Ref 2 contains only the company name in a list with 203 others. Ref 3 is just an address. Ref 4's only mention of Aversan is indistinguishable from a press release, and ref 5's is indistinguishable from machine translation of a press release. —Cryptic 18:35, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete: It seems as if the only notable thing about this company is that a trade journal listed it in a top-10 list (ref 4). The first 3 references are just directory listings. I cannot speak to reference 5, as it is in Chinese. Personally, I would not call this significant coverage, but the bar here is very low. For example, the article on the cited trade journal, Wings (Canadian magazine), has no references at all. ubiquity (talk) 18:38, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The given references fall short of approaching the required depth for encyclopaedic notability and searches are turning up just routine announcements. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 21:41, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:46, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:46, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:46, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.