Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Módulo

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 keep. The lack of coverage in reliable sources was refutted by Northamerica1000. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 15:17, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Módulo

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

While this company does exist, from what I can see it lacks sufficient substantial rs coverage to meet our notability guidelines. Tagged for lack of notability and lack of refs for two years. Epeefleche (talk) 19:26, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:54, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:55, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Per the Google News link above for this AfD discussion, I added the first link listed in the search to the article, significant coverage in the New York Times that addresses this company in detail:

Rich, Jennifer L. (February 26, 2001). "Technology; Brazilian Company Is Hacking Its Way Up". The New York Times. Retrieved December 30, 2011. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)

...Other Spanish and Portugese-language news sources appear to be available.

—Northamerica1000^(talk) 04:41, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – More reliable sources added to the article:

"Modulo boosts 2002 sales to US$7.8mn - Brazil". Business News Americas. February 14, 2003. Retrieved December 30, 2011. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
"Módulo: E-crime bill to enter congress - Brazil". Business News Americas. March 22, 2004. Retrieved December 30, 2011. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
"Modulo first in world with ISO 27001 - Brazil". Business News Americas. February 3, 2006. Retrieved December 30, 2011. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
Ozores, Pedro (October 26, 2011). "Gartner ITxpo 2011 watch: Modulo, UOLDiveo, Cipher - Brazil". Business News Americas. Retrieved December 30, 2011. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help) (subscription required)

—Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:00, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. If no-one can find any sources, then perhaps it doesn't need to have a Wikipedia entry. --Wtshymanski (talk) 05:50, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But someone has found some sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 15:30, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – See sources above. This !vote isn't ~~particularly~~ valid. Northamerica1000^(talk) 00:30, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per availability of reliable sources, topic passes WP:GNG. Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:30, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NA. Is that also your keep !vote up above? Or am I (as may be the case) confused. Tx.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:35, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Struck out my accidental double vote. Error! Northamerica1000^(talk) 00:24, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. It happens to all of us, at some point.--Epeefleche (talk) 04:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Coverage has been found. They had revenues of $13.6 million in the year 2000 alone. Dream Focus 15:29, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce (talk | contribs) 06:23, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep, multiple non trivial coverage in RS meets the GNG every time.LuciferWildCat (talk) 19:16, 7 January 2012 (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.