Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TDMA Phytotechnology

: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 speedy delete per WP:CSD#A7. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:44, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

=[[TDMA Phytotechnology]]=

:{{la|TDMA Phytotechnology}} ([{{fullurl:TDMA Phytotechnology|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TDMA Phytotechnology}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Appears to be NN company. No ghits for media mention, website just landing page SimonLyall (talk) 12:14, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. —SimonLyall (talk) 12:19, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Speedy delete: a non-consumer tech business that contains no claim of importance. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Speedy deletion - A7 The article asserts no notability at all and a [http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=%22TDMA+Phytotechnology%22&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&fp=Yxcf45uQ1Fc Google search] and [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?um=1&ned=us&hl=en&q=%22TDMA+Phytotechnology%22&cf=all Google News Archive search] return no reliable sources. Cunard (talk) 16:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 17:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
this isn't the yellow pages. delete. plan 8 (talk) 02:09, 19 June 2009 (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.