Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bromcom

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. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 21:26, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bromcom[edit]

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

Pure advertisement of a non-notable company. The army of single-purpose accounts contributing to that article—Lt06097, Tiger1954, Denizguryel, Hkutlay, and StacyLarkin—rings the sockpuppet alarm. In fact, I have opened a corresponding sockpuppet investigation. bender235 (talk) 18:28, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:34, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:34, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- This is not a good article. Its filed account show a turnover of £60M but assets under £2M, which probably indicates that it is being financed by directors' loans. [1] . Peterkingiron (talk) 17:38, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As noted, this article needs massive pruning but the sources given show the company has "...been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." --Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 01:08, 15 November 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, – Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:59, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per GNG. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 15:43, 21 November 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.