Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UseMyServices

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) 08:32, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

UseMyServices

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

Taking the liberty of duplication PROD concerns which I agree with (contested by an SPA). The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back. User:Piotrus . I came across this article while checking COI / SPAM / paid editors. Widefox; talk 14:17, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:17, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:17, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as prod nominator, per my unaddressed concerns cited above. deprodding is another red flag suggesting we should investigate all edits of this spam entry's creator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:30, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker ^talk 01:43, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:21, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete They got a little publicity due to the negotiations with Dragons Den, but there's not enough information to pass WP:CORP. --MelanieN (talk) 02:55, 29 November 2014 (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.