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. (WP:NPASR). (non-admin closure) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:42, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

QASymphony[edit]

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

I can't find any RSes to support this company's notability. The included references are all either trivial coverage, press releases or about products that the company has created, not about the company itself. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:23, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the company deserve a place in Wiki since it's a registered company, has background and history as well as has done many community activities. The company is a bit new so not many press releases can be found but the CEO has appeared in New York Times Profile. The issue may lie in how the article was written, as the product section seems to have more attention than the company itself. It can be rewritten and then good to go. Tea Nguyen(talk)

Comment Two comments actually. Tea Nguyen works in the company's marketing department. Second, the company I work for is a registered company, has background and history as well as has done many community activities. What you're describing does not mean that my company is worthy of an article on Wikipedia. The company's notability does. See WP:GNG and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). If this is a case of WP:TOOSOON, then so be it, but it doesn't get an article on Wikipedia because it may become notable at some point in the future. I have nothing against you or the company. My concern is that Wikipedia not proliferate articles about subjects that have no notability. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:42, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:12, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:12, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:12, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, buff bills 7701 16:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:20, 3 March 2014 (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.