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. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:23, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Phurnace[edit]

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

This article was originally nominated for CSDa7. While I don't feel that it proves notability, there is enough doubt in my mind that I wasn't comfortable deleting it. However, I feel an Afd is warranted as that there are significant problems with the article, notably WP:COI, WP:N and WP:CORP. Trusilver 15:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete cannot find any evidence in second or third party sources to suggest notability. --neon white talk 16:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete school project. I was also tempted to tag it db-spam. I agree that there are significant problems, first of all that the company does not appear notable. It was created and primarily edited by a single-purpose account. Ohconfucius (talk) 03:56, 6 June 2008 (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.