Elsupy

GlobalScholar

There's nothing to indicate that this small business is notable enough for its own article. Most businesses around the planet will never become big enough to get an article here. You may want to consider another site. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:24, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

yes,though I restored it to you user space for working on, as User:Elsupy/GlobalScholar, it has to show by references from some published 3rd party reliable source that it is already notable. Maybe you can do that, but if not, it won't be able to stay here. You might see also WP:BFAQ for some good general advice on what is needed. DGG (talk) 18:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Added References

I've added 8 difference websites that talk specifically about GlobalScholar. I hope this is sufficient. If need be. I can add more references

Possibly. TechCrunch is I think a major industry blog, with references supporting its own notability & reliability, and it's a regular item there, not an unedited reader comment. Forbes is not the magazine, but their PR newsletter which republishes press releases, but at least they thought it worth the inclusion. The others show only local notability. I'm going to move it back into mainspace & it can take its chances. It's good enough to avoid speedy, at any rate. DGG (talk) 19:47, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

And please remember to sign your mesages on talk pages with 4 tildes like this ~~~~ DGG (talk) 19:48, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Nomination of GlobalScholar for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article GlobalScholar is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GlobalScholar until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. RBrideau (talk) 18:54, 11 September 2012 (UTC)