Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TheOptionsLab

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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TheOptionsLab

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

Promotional page for non-notable company. Completely unsupported by citations to reliable sources. Ronnotel (talk) 18:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.
Delete per nomination. An online trading analyst business that makes no claim to historical, technical, or cultural significance. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 18:55, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A claim is made of technical significance: "The Options Lab was specifically mentioned by Barron's magazine for its unique approach to analyze ( [sic]) risks and rewards in options trading." Whether or not the claim is true is not verified. Barrons' online search does reveal a single article result for the phrase "Options Lab"; it is here. However, as a non-subscriber, I don't have access to the full article. Perhaps someone with access to the archives can resolve the dilemma. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:15, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The link is to an article that supposedly discusses an improvement Fidelity has made to their bond trading capabilities, which seems tangential to this company which touts it's option capabilities. I'm not sure if I can see the entire article, it appears to be oddly truncated. However, even if they are mentioned in the article, it's would hardly be enough to establish notability, I would think. Ronnotel (talk) 19:22, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. Saebvn (talk) 21:48, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I found zero sources with significant coverage. Joe Chill (talk) 00:12, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: From this source http://www.investorbrain.com/index.php/site/P15/, you can read the mentioned Barrons' article in full. Make sure do a search on words "The Options Lab", this article was published in Barron’s, September 7, 2009. Title is "Saturday, September 12, 2009 Fidelity Spiffs Up Its Bond System", other notable references include Trader's resource (http://technical.traders.com/Products/display.asp?prodid=545&dbname=internet\internet&tablename=internet), 01:12, 6 October 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sethmethod (talk • contribs) — Sethmethod (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Weak Delete - Aside from the Barrons' article, I don't see sufficient depth of coverage of multiple reliable sources to warrant keeping it. If kept, it needs to be updated appropriately. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artlovesyou (talk • contribs) 05:11, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete One incidental mention in a Barrons article is not sufficient to establish notability. Figureofnine (talk) 15:29, 6 October 2010 (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.