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 keep. Davewild (talk) 18:21, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WyzAnt[edit]

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

Non-notable web page, and so promotional. Fails WP:GNG, WP:CORP, WP:WEB and WP:PROMO. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:52, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:04, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:04, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:04, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article already contains one article from Forbes and one article in Entrepreneur. Both are written by staff journalists and in both WyzAnt is the subject of the article. Both papers are reputable, established, national-level publications. Appears to pass WP:CORP. CorporateM (Talk) 07:01, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:02, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure but maybe weak keep since it's neat and sourced. My searches didn't find much here, here and here and, in fact, the current two news sources may be some of the best coverage there is. The Entrepreneur and Forbes are good sources and may be potential for future coverage although my results only show a somewhat stable (not that much) amount a year. SwisterTwister talk 04:37, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:43, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per CorporateM. Plus it passes another informal tech startup test, which is that it is still growing and successful after a number of years, so that the coverage isn't just a one-time buzz when the company is launched. – Margin1522 (talk) 14:19, 17 June 2015 (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.