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.
Another rather non-notable company that wouldn't even be close to locally notable with my searches finding nothing outstandingly good
here,
here,
here and
here. In a way, this one's a little different than others, it's been rather heavily edited by people from the company and even went as far as blanking the page for the
"negative information" and later an IP started rewriting cotnent in July 2013; with no improvement or signs of it since March 2008, better to delete.
SwisterTwistertalk 05:53, 12 July 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete: As per the nominator, I am seeing nothing beyond routine announcements in the period to 2009 and then the given references to the legal action, but nothing that would meet
WP:CORPDEPTH.
AllyD (
talk) 08:54, 12 July 2015 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:41, 19 July 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete Non-notable franchise business with no recent news coverage. Most notable is the franchisee lawsuit but that suit was dismissed. Interestingly, the
official website listed in news coverage (as in
Franchising.com) now belongs to a different company that helps people search public records. There is a similar business at
PRStore but a) it is in Scotland and b) this company was founded in 1999 while the U.S. company was founded in 2002.
LizRead!Talk! 09:16, 19 July 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete per others.
Citobun (
talk) 07:35, 23 July 2015 (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.
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.
Another rather non-notable company that wouldn't even be close to locally notable with my searches finding nothing outstandingly good
here,
here,
here and
here. In a way, this one's a little different than others, it's been rather heavily edited by people from the company and even went as far as blanking the page for the
"negative information" and later an IP started rewriting cotnent in July 2013; with no improvement or signs of it since March 2008, better to delete.
SwisterTwistertalk 05:53, 12 July 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete: As per the nominator, I am seeing nothing beyond routine announcements in the period to 2009 and then the given references to the legal action, but nothing that would meet
WP:CORPDEPTH.
AllyD (
talk) 08:54, 12 July 2015 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:41, 19 July 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete Non-notable franchise business with no recent news coverage. Most notable is the franchisee lawsuit but that suit was dismissed. Interestingly, the
official website listed in news coverage (as in
Franchising.com) now belongs to a different company that helps people search public records. There is a similar business at
PRStore but a) it is in Scotland and b) this company was founded in 1999 while the U.S. company was founded in 2002.
LizRead!Talk! 09:16, 19 July 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete per others.
Citobun (
talk) 07:35, 23 July 2015 (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.