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. Cirt (talk) 07:33, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TCSJOHNHUXLEY[edit]

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

Declining db-copyvio (because article was rewritten quickly after being tagged as copyvio), and declining db-corp because this is a hard call. A Google news search gives 30 hits even after subtracting a lot of "press release" keywords[1], but I didn't find any single hit that established notability, the question is whether the sheer number of hits plus the size of the company is good enough for notability. The tone is currently promotional, but in fairness, that happened after we threatened to delete for lack of notability ... that happens sometimes. - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 16:52, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Vanity, advertising, i'd have gone with speedy A7. --neon white talk 21:08, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, fails notability per WP:CORP. Searching finds no significant coverage in reliable, third-party, sources.  Esradekan Gibb  ^"Talk" 02:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination, a non-consumer business serving a small clientele: gaming industry's leading supplier of casino equipment. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:59, 24 April 2009 (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.