Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Campus Venture Network

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The result was withdrawn. The article has been redirected to StudentBusinesses.com. Cunard (talk) 06:52, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Campus Venture Network[edit]

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

I have removed the speedy tag from this article because notability is asserted by this passing mention at TechCrunch. I have also done a Google News Archive search, which returned this article from this passing mention from masshightech.com. Because these sources only mention Campus Venture Network in one sentence each, this company fails the notability guidelines for companies. Cunard (talk) 05:47, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While the Campus Venture Network search yields four results from noteworthy sources, a search for StudentBusinesses.com (which the article references as the core Campus Venture Network product) returns articles with mentions from Washington Post, BusinessWeek, the the Boston Globe, the Triangle Business Journal, the Harvard Crimson, etc. Thus the company (including its product) has received widespread coverage of sufficient notability to fulfill the notability guidelines for companies. Strav17 (talk) 06:04, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

None of the sources posted above mention "Campus Venture Network". Cunard (talk) 06:07, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All of the articles reference StudentBusinesses.com, which is the core product owned by the company Campus Venture Network as the article references. According to the notability guidelines for companies, "Information on products and services should generally be included in the article on the company itself, unless the company article is so large that this would make the article unwieldy." Since the articles lend credibility to the product itself (StudentBusinesses.com) being notable, shouldn't the company then be considered notable?Strav17 (talk) 06:22, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because all of the articles are about StudentBusinesses.com, an article about the product is the best approach. StudentBusinesses.com appears to be notable due to the presence of many reliable sources, but Campus Venture Network is not notable because there are no reliable sources that provide significant coverage about it. Perhaps you could move the information in this article to one about StudentBusinesses.com? Cunard (talk) 06:30, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I've updated the article Campus Venture Network to be a redirect for StudentBusinesses.com. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Strav17 (talk • contribs) 06:46, 3 November 2009 (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.