Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BackConnect

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:05, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BackConnect[edit]

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

fails WP:CORP. created by single purpose editor. Zero gnews hits LibStar (talk) 17:35, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:CORP. SW3 5DL (talk) 16:47, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:24, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 16:40, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: A WP:SPA article on a new firm. Notability is not inherited by the firm's officials being quoted in respect of incidents, and I am not seeing the coverage of the firm itself that would be needed to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 16:46, 31 December 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.