Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Actronics

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:15, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actronics[edit]

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

Only one example of third-party coverage. Prof. Squirrel (talk) 16:20, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many problems with the display of information. It is bad and all over the place but... it could be recovered but not at this state. I will try to keep this article afloat. I am neutral. Sipslice11 (talk) 21:36, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 23:44, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 23:44, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:47, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Given the wide range of worldwide firms named "Actronics", this is better sought through a (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) but I am finding nothing more/better than the nominator did (and note that the article's claim to notability is not supported by that ref which describes the firm as just "one of Europe’s market leaders in..." its specialist field). I am not seeing encyclopaedic notability here: fails WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 09:32, 15 December 2013 (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.