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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 14:06, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

TAVtech[edit]

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

No independent reliable third-party sources. Local coverage and vanity coverage, but nothing to indicate corporate notability. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:14, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as still nothing for actual independent notability and substance given the sources are all clear announcements, and nothing else better exists, and there's no automatic inherited notability from from anything or anyone as stated by our non-negotiable policies. For a company to only have mere announcements in the near 2 years of existence shows it's simply not established in our standards of significance. Clear advertising alone, SwisterTwister talk 03:33, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The statement made by Robert McClenon, "No independent reliable third-party sources" is simply false. The page includes numerous third party and unaffiliated sources. It makes no sense why he is contesting the page's existence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steven8200 (talk • contribs) 21:46, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. WP requires independent sources, not press releases, not essays submitted by students, not social media posts. This article looks like the "about" section of a Facebook group or page. WP:NOTFACEBOOK, WP:COI. Jack N. Stock (talk) 07:01, 8 February 2017 (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.