Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Opticomm

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--Ymblanter (talk) 07:11, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Opticomm[edit]

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

Declined a PROD on this article. It makes at least a passing claim to notability and referencing, so might benefit from the wider editor review of AfD. -- Euryalus (talk) 04:08, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as I still confirm my detailed PROD. SwisterTwister talk 17:57, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 17:58, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 17:58, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Corporate PR. Falls below borderline for notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:29, 3 July 2016 (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.