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. ÷seresin 06:08, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

There are some unknowns here and at New media life cycle, which I'm bundling into this AfD. Is the user named Davis the same Davis who runs the company? Is this mainly an internet marketing company? (We get a lot of those.) Are the recent mentions at CNN.com and in large newspapers a flash in the pan, or indicative of notability? - Dank (push to talk) 21:33, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• New media life cycle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. -- - Dank (push to talk) 21:33, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. -- - Dank (push to talk) 21:34, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete New media life cycle for sure, the phrase has only 40 Google hits. Tippingpoint Labs itself does not seem notable to me, and the article is pure spam. Abductive (talk) 21:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• 'DElete as vanispam...ment Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 22:55, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• No Delete New media life cycle is a legitimate topic, the fact that it is not yet widely debated and search on Google doesn't make in any less valid, does it? [1]. If agencies like BoatHouse and Razorfish are notable - why not Tippingpoint?.
  • Actually, "not yet widely debated" is the definition of not notable. These other agencies may or may not be notable; you are free to look into the deletion process for them. Abductive (talk) 21:56, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as nn spam. Ray^Talk 00:12, 16 June 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.