Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IQor

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 no consensus. MBisanz ^talk 01:21, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IQor

This previously spam-y, now spam-y and slam-y article, describes a company whose press seems limited to press releases plus a tiny amount of very local coverage in the area where it operates. The references provided do nothing to demonstrate the notability of the topic, and nobody with knowledge of the company seems interested in improving the article. Bongo matic 04:09, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:16, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Googling I find a bunch of articles that steer towards WP:N such as [1], [2]. Not major stuff, but enough for WP:N on a company I think. The article needs cleaning up surely, but I don't think deletion. FlyingToaster 05:27, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A non-consumer services business, a call center company, which they refer grandiosely and vaguely too as "business process" in the first sentence. The references provided by Flying Toaster reveal that one of the people in charge of the company sits on a museum board. That does not make the business notable. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:10, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I can understand that the web results include PR to most extent, but there are other sources as well. These include an award among others ([3], [4], [5], [6]). There's also some coverage on the company under its old name and a subsidiary. ^LeaveSleaves 19:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's a word for "awards" given by software companies to their customers--advertising. The coverage you cited is mainly very local (i.e., not suitable for demonstrating notability), and the IBD article isn't about IQor, but about the founder. The search for the old name generates press releases. The subsidiary may actually be notable, but notability is not inherited. Bongo matic 00:00, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you are willing to search through the results, there are articles present that aren't just press releases ([7], [8], [9]). And since when local coverage unacceptable? And how are sources 3 and 6 local? In the matter of inheritance, Allied Interstate is a subsidiary, hence part of the company and hence part of the notability. ^LeaveSleaves 01:56, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Local coverage (where "local" doesn't only mean geographic--IndUS is a perfect example of a non-geographic variety of local coverage) is widely viewed to be insufficient to establish notability. See footnote 5 of WP:N for some justification, but more generally read AfD discussions. What is reliable for sourcing facts is not necessarily demonstrative of notability. Bongo matic 04:47, 22 January 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.