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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:13, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3A Tutors Ltd

[edit]

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

Can't find independent reliable sources about the company. The references in the article are about the two students and do not mention the company. John of Reading (talk) 10:22, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 10:45, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The given references are poor: presumably this firm is the "centre in Bristol" mentioned in the Basingstoke Gazette, but that and the other references fail verification. Nor are my searches finding better reliable sources about the firm itself: fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:GNG. AllyD (talk) 10:53, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable either as an educational institution or as a business. Emeraude (talk) 15:10, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per above --Seacactus 13 (talk) 18:59, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG. The references given in the article for the child prodigies are irrelevant as they do not mention 3A Tutors Ltd. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 21:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-significant for wiki standards Light2021 (talk) 19:17, 10 January 2017 (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.