Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canvas Infotech

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. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:34, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Canvas Infotech

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

Just a run of the mill CA info-tech company. Does not meet WP:CORPDEPTH or any number of other policies and guidelines. Shirt58 (talk) 13:05, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, reading the "run of the mill" description from Wikipedia i think it does not fit in any of its categories. As you can read, this company has offices in Sunnyvale and India, with clients as important as Fox, Facebook or Apple. Problem is that with an "accounting" company you usually don't publish that on any kind of source, you keep that to yourself. That's why it's very dificult to find secondary sources for this kind of business. Nevertheless i would like to improve the article. So even though this is tagged for deletion i'm going to search for more sources. Thank you. Elandroid (talk) 13:35, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Run-of-the-mill or not, there aren't multiple WP:RELIABLE sources necessary to establish notability. JNW (talk) 13:50, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete I'm trying to gather and add more sources, i've added two (i think) this morning and i will be searching and adding more. And as I said before sometimes the companies don't want to tell to everybody who made their accounting and such. So it's harder.Elandroid (talk) 14:19, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Elandroid, deletion discussions usually last for at least seven days, except for cases of blatant policy violations that must be deleted immediately. There's no need to worry, you have time. If you can find reliable sources that prove this company is notable enough for an article, it won't be deleted. Novusuna ^talk 16:36, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 14:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 14:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete poorly-sourced article that fails WP:CORPDEPTH. Logical Cowboy (talk) 00:28, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete For a tech company to have a presence in California and India isa remarkably routine; all large corporations buy thousands of minor products from not notable manufacturers, but yes, it is true that for most accounting companies it is impossible to show notability the way WP uses the term. 'DGG (at NYPL)' (talk) 19:37, 6 January 2014 (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.