Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Insidetrak

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 no consensus. Killiondude (talk) 06:23, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Insidetrak[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nothing of significant kind in WP:RS. Fails WP:NWEB. Störm (talk) 06:03, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I could only find one source [1], and even that of unknown reliability. —cnzx (talk • contribs) 06:06, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 06:51, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 06:51, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 06:52, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NEXIST. Found three reliable independent sources (SMH, news.com.au, and SmartCompany) that are more than trivial mentions of the company. Probably sufficient to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. Kb.au (talk) 09:20, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Very weak keep There are some non trivial references, but still partially primary. Aoziwe (talk) 12:20, 27 December 2017 (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.