Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Host Virtual

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. Consensus is that the page can't stay, no consensus on a redirect. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:53, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Host Virtual (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

References are close association with company or written like PR exercise. it does not have substance for Wikipedia notability criteria. It should be deleted. Light21 19:35, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

• delete text is a bit brochure-like, little evidence of notability as a hosting company - David Gerard (talk) 17:12, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:20, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:20, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:20, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Virtual Private Cloud  I didn't find much in Google searches.  The first and fifth references in the article are press releases.  The second reference counts toward GNG, but since it appears to be a rewritten press release has little depth.  The KWQC reference was a dead link.  I also checked and this company is not listed with investing.businessweek.com, which is generally a good indicator of notability.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:44, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:PROMO; company's product brochure in the form of a wikipedia article. I don't see a reason to redirect to Virtual private cloud since this is a technology article; I don't think it would be intuitive to redirect a company name to it. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:07, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No claim of significance and far from satisfying WP:CORPDEPTH. A redirect btw is not appropriate here as we don't redirect companies to a generic article about a service. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 07:38, 2 October 2016 (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.