Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CoinCorner

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. The concensus is that the company does not meet the notability criteria. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:52, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CoinCorner

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

Promotional article on non-notable company.. The only RS is a general one of the line of business, not the company. The rest are press releases in trade magazines or blogs. DGG ( talk ) 18:34, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as not all convincing of any applicable notability, nothing here from the article suggests anything better at all and I would not Ave accepted like Joseph2302 had last April. SwisterTwister talk 19:24, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SwisterTwister I have amended the article to include up-to-date information and reliable sources. I ask you kindly to reconsider the proposed deletion or let me know how I can further improve this article, thank you. Brollymook (talk) 13:10, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:24, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:24, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 02:03, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as clearly not notable from searches.

ThePlatypusofDoom - May I ask what makes this company any less notable than any of the other bitcoin exchanges listed on Wikipedia? Thanks. Brollymook (talk) 16:02, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Brollymook: That argument is invalid, see WP:WAX. ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 16:18, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@ThePlatypusofDoom: Thanks for the link and I apologise for the poor quality argument, however, I do believe that this article meets the criteria set out under WP:GNG. CoinCorner has a number of notable achievements and has received significant coverage from reliable sources that are verifiable, including global mainstream media such as Bloomberg, The Independent and the BBC, as well as working with the Isle of Man Government. The co-founders of CoinCorner have been interviewed by 2 international TV shows (Russia Today and Arte.tv). All sources are referenced in the article, supporting evidence that CoinCorner has received significant attention from independent sources to support a claim of notability.

May I ask what searches are you referring to? I appreciate that CoinCorner may not appear notable in US searches, however, CoinCorner is a UK company and appears in a number of UK-related searches. Thanks Brollymook (talk) 15:20, 7 June 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.