Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smallworld Cable

:{{la|Smallworld Cable}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Smallworld_Cable Stats])

:({{Find sources|Smallworld Cable}})

Article seems to be mainly promotional. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:44, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

• Keep I can see why you might come to that conclusion, especially when reading the 'products and services' section, but that part of the article can always be shortened and maybe even re-written if a change in the tone of that section is required. I don't believe this one reason is enough for the entire article to be deleted.(Rillington (talk) 14:34, 2 February 2014 (UTC))

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

• Delete None of the sources help it really pass wp:NCORP - not even the one I've just replaced with an archive.org link Neonchameleon (talk) 17:40, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

---

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:13, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

---

---

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

---

: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.