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. Davewild (talk) 21:59, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actar[edit]

Actar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Appears to be a non-notable biomedical/pharmaceutical sales company. Thay have a lack of external coverage, and therefore don't appear to be meeting our present notability standards. If you click on "Timeline" on that search, you'll see virtually all the press they have is stock reports, in a generic and repeating format, and no other independent coverage. Delete. • Lawrence Cohen 20:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per good nomination. No assertion of notability, no sources, no reason to be here. Actar does not improve Wikipedia, therefore, Wikipedia should not improve Actar Keeper | 76 21:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and Keeper76. NN company; no real cites. Bearian'sBooties (talk) 22:39, 21 November 2007 (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.