Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TEC Edmonton

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:26, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

TEC Edmonton

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

TEC Edmonton is a non-notable business accelerator. I've found routine coverage, brief mentions, (fail WP:CORPDEPTH) press releases, and CEO quotes (fail WP:CORPIND). — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:24, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:25, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alberta-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:25, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Surprising that you think one of the most influential and largest Canadian accelerators which is also run by a Top 5 Canadian university is non-notable. Apologies that it was not incorporated in the States, where it would rank ahead of many accelerators located there and some of which are notable enough to have their own wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahroze (talk • contribs) 00:54, 29 January 2018 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Shahroze (talk • contribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. — Note to closing admin: Shahroze (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]
- WP:NOTINHERITED and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:07, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shahroze - To put it a better way, Wikipedia does not rely on how large or influential a company is. What matters is what sources say about it. It could be the largest company in the world but without significant coverage in reliable sources - including in-depth coverage - the company would not meet notability guidelines. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:51, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- Seemingly non-notable organization that fails WP:ORGDEPTH, as the article is entirely sourced with tribal mentions, sources close to the subject, or interviews with member of the organization. A speedy delete is possible given the article creator’s blanking of the page. SamHolt6 (talk) 01:59, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 10:51, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - There is coverage, but mainly routine mentions and nothing that would satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:52, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I am the original author and request deletion for this page so that it can be rewritten at a future date with more coverage and accuracy to satisfy the notability requirements. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahroze (talk • contribs) 20:23, 3 February 2018 (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.