Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FreshMinds

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 of the debate was Keep, passes WP:CORP and information is easily verified.  RasputinAXP  c 14:01, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

FreshMinds

The company seems to fail WP:CORP for both companies and services.Also, note that the original creator of the article, Charlieosmond (talk · contribs), appears to be the co-funder of FreshMinds [1], and is also the creator of Caroline Plumb's article, the other co-funder of the company, and about Business research, the main topic of his company. I qualify this as vanity, hidden advertisment, or both. ReyBrujo 04:30, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

• Comment, apparently the company is notable enough according to the Talk:FreshMinds. However, I still want to hear the opinion of the community about the apparent founder of the company creating the article himself. -- ReyBrujo 04:33, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep this strikes me as a case where WP:VAIN isn't useful. The article is factual and NPOV and is about a notable enough company. Just because the founder of the company wrote the article isn't in itself enough to delete it. True vanity articles are essentially POV, this is not one of them. All "IMHO" of course, Gwernol 04:46, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep As above, VAIN is not useful for articles which can easily be critiqued and made NPOV by outside editors. As long as the original information was not COPYVIO, I say that it is notable enough given its revenue and number of employees to warrant an article on it. Ansell 11:15, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete after reviewing the "in the news" links used to rule out WP:CORP, I believe FreshMinds still fails the test. The only article specifically about FreshMinds was an early press release that got published within months of starting business. The other articles were not about FreshMinds at all but included brief employee quotes or references to the company in articles about something else entirely. Several of the links were also dead. Rklawton 19:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Rklawton, part of a walled garden. Stifle (talk) 00:20, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I believe there is little doubt FreshMinds meets WP:CORP. Articles about FreshMinds have been published by the Financial Times, The Times, The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph. These are the UK's leading broadsheet newspapers and the articles are about the firm, it's not a simple side mention. In addition the relevant UK trade press have all commented about the company. Evidence of this can be found at the "press" section in the website if you care to read it. I can understand the claims of WP:VAIN, however the listing exists in order to ensure simple, factual information is present about this firm. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.111.156.122 (talk • contribs) .

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.