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The result was Nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure). Ecoleetage (talk) 22:46, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SunRun[edit]

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

Problems with WP:RS (the New York Times and San Jose Mercury News coverage just mentions the company in passing) and possible WP:CORP issues, too. It doesn't help that the article reads like an advertisement. The sun may not shine on this article for much longer. Nomination withdrawn Due to excellent referencing that confirmed the subject's notability. Thank you, one and all, for your comments Ecoleetage (talk) 20:17, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Added a couple of non-trivial references and removed ad-speak. Gr1st (talk) 22:13, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Adequate stub. Johnfos (talk) 23:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The newly added references come from strong media sources, admittedly, but their coverage is extremely weak -- they just mention that very young SunRun raised $12 million. I still don't see how the company fares in regard to WP:CORP or even WP:N. Any comments or additional sources that illuminate (no pun intended) the notability of the subject will be welcome. Thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 20:24, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a little unfair, Eco: the Reuters article looks like a full-blown profile of the company to me, running to two-and-a-bit pages. Anyway, added a further source to the article which may or may not sway you. Gr1st (talk) 21:11, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Added SunRun's mention in USA Today, with a quote from Nat Kreamer weientan —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:23, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep to me it smells of WP:ADVERT (I wish it could be expanded) but it seems to have RS and seems to barely pass the notability test.

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.