Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TorFX
: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. Mojo Hand (talk) 05:24, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
=[[TorFX]]=
:{{la|TorFX}} – (
:({{Find sources|TorFX}})
This is an advert. Not notable. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:06, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:24, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete lack of RS indicates failure of GNG BlueSalix (talk) 00:26, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment A user probably connected to the compnay has tried to beef it up but it is still weak on notability. One quote in a newspaper, a local business award (everyone who buy a table at the event gets one) and the Sunday Times award. It's not really enough. Redirect to Currencies Direct? Philafrenzy (talk) 13:27, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Don't see any solid notability in this. Admiral Caius (talk) 15:28, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete - I agree that it doesn't meet GNG. Wieno (talk) 05:20, 4 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.