Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Novus Consulting (2nd nomination) Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Novus_Consulting_(2nd_nomination)

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. MBisanz ^talk 00:34, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Novus Consulting

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

Company seems to lack notability. I'm not finding sources that show this Novus Consulting is the "subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources" as per WP:ORG. The article lacks third-party references (well, any references) that would help in the search to establish Notability. Stesmo (talk) 23:47, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 23:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 00:00, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No indication of notability in the article and I can't find any references that show notability per WP:NORG or WP:GNG. T.C.Haliburton^{talk nerdy to me} 04:20, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete Yawn. Yet another small IT company with no significant independent sourcing. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:52, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I searched as well and found the same results as nom. There's another, possibly notable firm of this name operating in Scandanavia that I found in news searches, but that one is certainly not this one. I could find absolutely no reliable independent secondary sources whatsoever to support notability of this one as required by WP:GNG or WP:CORPDEPTH. Msnicki (talk) 16:56, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Besides all that, this is a promotional advertisement for the firm. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:47, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no reliable sources evidencing notability. — Joaquin008 ^(talk) 22:00, 20 December 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.