Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xacore

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. Michig (talk) 11:31, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Xacore

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

Another questionably notable and improvable company article as the best I found was this and this and the history simply shows how much attention this article has gotten since starting in March 2010. Pinging tagger Eeekster. SwisterTwister talk 06:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 06:13, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 06:13, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 06:13, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 06:13, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor ^Talk! 05:27, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Could not establish notability. ~Kvng (talk) 14:41, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor ^Talk! 04:36, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: An article that has had some WP:SPA attention and has featured then lost some advertising content. Highbeam returns a few routine announcements but nothing to establish this as more than a routine firm going about its business. I see nothing to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 08:00, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Very poorly written. Mirror360 (talk) 13:40, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Revert as per WP:BLOCKEVASION using strikethrough font. 22:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)]

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.