This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Michigan Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Michigan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Michigan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MichiganWikipedia:WikiProject MichiganTemplate:WikiProject MichiganMichigan articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Companies Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Companies To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes Maintain : Portal:Companies Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs Other : Tag company articles with the {{ portal|Companies}} template Tag company talk pages with the {{ WikiProject Companies}} project banner Answer requests for comments

I see that the article has been tagged for speedy deletion as spam. I disagree. There is a clear COI issue, as the author has uploaded the company logo as his own work, which I have warned him about. Despite this,the article is not particularly spammy. It says what the company does and what its products are in a very stubby way without promoting them. The real concern is notability. I was going to tag it for deletion on those grounds but after Googling it I decided that it was getting enough coverage not to be speedily deleted and I put the Chicago Tribune article on as a reference. I am not saying that I would vote "strong keep" if this was an AfD, but I don't think it speediable as spam either. -- DanielRigal ( talk) 17:58, 29 November 2009 (UTC) reply