Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Adam Internet: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 03:34, 12 September 2008 editS Marshall (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers32,385 edits →Adam Internet ← Previous edit		Revision as of 01:07, 13 September 2008 edit undoRet.Prof (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers15,357 edits →Adam Internet Next edit →
Line 8:		Line 8:
	::*Article claims of the number of staff and customers it has doesn't make it notable. ] (]) 02:24, 12 September 2008 (UTC)		::*Article claims of the number of staff and customers it has doesn't make it notable. ] (]) 02:24, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
	:::*I don't get the objection to this article at all, then. Coverage in reliable sources is what makes something notable, and you agree in your nomination that Adam Internet has reliable sources. So what's the problem?--] ]/] 03:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)		:::*I don't get the objection to this article at all, then. Coverage in reliable sources is what makes something notable, and you agree in your nomination that Adam Internet has reliable sources. So what's the problem?--] ]/] 03:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

			:*'''Keep''' but more work is needed--] (]) 01:07, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:07, 13 September 2008

Adam Internet

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

The article has 3 reliable sources but the article fails to state notability. Bidgee (talk) 00:27, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Bidgee (talk) 00:29, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Keep because the article claims the company has 100+ staff and 75,000+ customers; I think this constitutes an assertion of notability.--S Marshall /_Cont 01:14, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Article claims of the number of staff and customers it has doesn't make it notable. Bidgee (talk) 02:24, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't get the objection to this article at all, then. Coverage in reliable sources is what makes something notable, and you agree in your nomination that Adam Internet has reliable sources. So what's the problem?--S Marshall /_Cont 03:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Keep but more work is needed--Ret.Prof (talk) 01:07, 13 September 2008 (UTC)