Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NetQuall

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:03, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NetQuall

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Nothing even approaching reliability as far as sources go. It's pretty much social media and routine business listings all the way down. GMG ^talk 12:52, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States-related deletion discussions.--Nahal^(T) 01:01, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.--Nahal^(T) 01:10, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.--Nahal^(T) 01:10, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:06, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There's nothing in the article that would support a claim of notability and nothing more found in a Google search. Alansohn (talk) 21:48, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Only routine insignificant coverage. SL93 (talk) 23:02, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails GNG. AmericanAir88^(talk) 14:57, 18 July 2019 (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.