Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Ronto Group (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. KTC (talk) 00:52, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Ronto Group

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

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. The old 2006 AfD, in the days notability was still fresh and poorly understood, ended up as no consensus with two keep votes - one from the creator and another from an editor who "has heard of it", therefore argued WP:ITSIMPORTANT. Sigh. As I discussed in my Signpost Op-Ed, this is a good example of Yellow-Pages like company spam. This one had almost a decade-run on Wikipedia, let's put it out of its - and out - misery. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:37, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 08:09, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:58, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now as I see no convincingly better improvement. SwisterTwister talk 23:33, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. They might conceivably be notable, but if someone ever wants to try to make an article in good faith then can use AfC. DGG ( talk ) 02:16, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - doesn't seem notable as far as developers go. I can't find any indepth coverage in secondary sources. The article has been a poorly referenced tiny stub for nearly a decade. Citobun (talk) 10:36, 17 November 2015 (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.