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 one "keep" makes no argument. Sandstein 12:41, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OBASHI[edit]

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

No evidence that this methodology is notable or even that it is being used. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:06, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! ^{Babymissfortune} 14:19, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! ^{Babymissfortune} 14:20, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Fergus Cloughley (talk) 19:21, 15 December 2017 (UTC) — Fergus Cloughley (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Comment: @Fergus Cloughley: Please do not upload non-free files such as File:ISACA_OBASHI.jpg for the sole purpose of adding them to this discussion. Non-free content can only be used in articles per Wikipedia non-free content use criteria #9, and even only then when it satisfies all ten non-free content criteria listed in WP:NFCCP. If you feel the information contained in that file is relevant to this discussion, then please provide an external link (if possible) to it instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:35, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Fergus, you have twice now cluttered this discussion with misplaced material. By all means edit the article. Then come back here and explain briefly how your edits now demonstrate notability. Incidentally the image you uploaded is, in my view, no evidence whatsoever. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:15, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:23, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

delete this is not WP article, but a hijacked page in the encyclopedia turned into an advertising brochure. Jytdog (talk) 22:08, 21 December 2017 (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.