Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madison Reed (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 keep. Ad Orientem (talk) 01:04, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Madison Reed (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)

Startup disruptor company and probably a borderline case in terms of meeting the WP:ORG requirement of multiple significant, reliable and independent coverage. There is a NYT article from its founding, a WSJ article as a disruptor and a Forbes article. I have a feeling that it is going to get to AfD anyway, so might as well test now and get a ruling. thanks Britishfinance (talk) 16:38, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:30, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:31, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep While this is on the border, after carefully thinking about it, I am of the opinion that current coverage,including that of NYT and Forbes (an actual Forbes writer not a contributor) constitutes the sort of coverage that satisfies the standard present in NCORP. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:54, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:13, 25 January 2019 (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.
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madison Reed (2nd nomination), released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.