Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armoured One

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 keep. MBisanz ^talk 02:35, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Armoured One[edit]

[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)

The company lacks significant WP:RS, non-notable company, fails WP:GNG. Meeanaya (talk) 06:42, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:43, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:43, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Plenty of WP:RS, significantly covering the subject to pass WP:GNG. Just look at the list of references. I cleaned up the page a while ago so it is less promotional, but I don't see why this fails WP:NCORP. Thanks, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 08:41, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I see the subject has been covered in various reputable publications and clearly passes the WP:RS, also does meet the general notability guidelines. Armoured One's training and its visits to schools have been reported by many news channels including KTLA Morning News, Spectrum News, WPTV Abdul.kanchwala (talk) 14:45, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I made up my mind to write an article about Armoured One after seeing its team being invited on many News shows to discuss on school shootings and how to deal with it. The article is thoroughly cited and meets the WP:GNG, WP:RS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdul.kanchwala (talk • contribs) 14:57, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Not sure why this was nominated for deletion under this rationale as the article contains plenty of sources to meet WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 19:54, 30 October 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.