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. MBisanz ^talk 21:11, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ideaca[edit]

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

non notable poorly sourced Consulting company. Unless we regard "largest SAP partner in Canada " as a sufficient, there's no evidence for notability . DGG ( talk ) 20:40, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:24, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

agree with DGG. "Largest SAP partner in Canada" statement removed along with citation. article aligns with guidelines. Andygao24 ( talk ) 09:51, 22 November 2012

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Theo polisme 01:17, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the references provided aren't compelling enough for me to believe that the company is notable. PK T(alk) 16:21, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please indicate which reference was not compelling enough for "you" to deem company is notable. Under notability guidelines, there should be a good-faith search for appropriate references. Andygao24 ( talk ) 11:44, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Wifione ^Message 15:19, 3 December 2012 (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.