Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ValCom

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 merge to PC Connection. Though I see little truly worth merging here, Courcelles 18:55, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ValCom[edit]

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

Non-notable as per WP:COMPANY. Created by company employee, sources are mainly corporate press releases. No WP:CORPDEPTH by secondary sources to suggest it was ever notable. Drm310 (talk) 18:10, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:13, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:13, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:13, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:13, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, promotional. Coretheapple (talk) 20:40, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The article says it was acquired by PC Connection in 2011. Is there any reason it shouldn't be merged there? Candleabracadabra (talk) 05:49, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep regardless of whether the current article is promotional, if there are sources that cumulatively meet WP:GNG, then we should have an article.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:58, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as suggested by Candleabracadabra. We usually merge old companies/subsidiaries that have been merged in real life. Especially, as Tony the Tiger implies, the company is barely notable. Bearian (talk) 18:13, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A Merge to PC Connection would be functional in this case, per WP:PRESERVE. Northamerica1000^(talk) 21:24, 20 December 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, | Uncle Milty | talk | 21:21, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The content here is effecively a list of certifications and partnership appropriate to the IT services areas covered by the firm's operation. I am not seeing clear evidence of notability of the firm in its own right, and am unclear whether any of that content that would really merit extending the brief mention already existing in PC Connection#Acquisitions? AllyD (talk) 09:22, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I cannot find any sources to support notability in the first five pages of a Google search. Merge makes no sense since the company isn't notable. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:11, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with PC Connection, although a lot would need to be culled. Gm545 (talk) 13:52, 2 January 2014 (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.