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. DGG ( talk ) 02:26, 4 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Supanet Limited[edit]

Supanet Limited (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Paged created by a known abusive sockpuppet User:Jaihosalman. Page appears to be self-promotion, also as evidenced by a Wikipedia link at subsidiary company at the bottom of http://www.timetalk.co.uk Deku-shrub (talk) 13:55, 19 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:40, 20 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:40, 20 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Delete as examining this has found nothing at all actually convincing of substance and minimally convincing notability. SwisterTwister talk 18:54, 26 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 18:55, 26 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Delete -- promo content on a non notable subject. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:04, 1 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Delete. Non-notable company and article is promotional. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 05:21, 3 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[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.