Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aeorads

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. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 01:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aeorads

Non-notable company under WP:CORP. No reliable independent sources presented (all sources that are presented are either not independent or do not even talk about the subject of the article, but rather a particular industry). Declined speedy (which I will say is completely improper as none of the assertions are for notability but just statements of fact). Material relevant to this discussion is also at Talk:Aeorads. Cquan ^{(after the beep...)} 03:22, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As speedy decliner. Sorry you don't find any of those statements, if sourced, would constitute notability, but I do. Still: unreferenced, fails WP:V. Jclemens (talk) 03:26, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 ^{Talk to me}_{My edits} 04:05, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I would like to vote for keeping, but verification of all sources failed. Also web seach does not any reliable source to establish a notability. Beagel (talk) 18:23, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I had nominated it for speedy since I found the sources to be unreliable and thought the whole concept to be notable, but not this particular company. I'm with Cquan and Beagel here. De728631 (talk) 16:51, 13 February 2009 (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.