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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:10, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arcutek Corporation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Clearly promotional. Does not meet the notability guide lines of WP:ORG Barbara ✐  ✉ 01:16, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – Apologies for the premature move, I moved the page back to a draft. JE98 (talk) 03:03, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 05:55, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 05:55, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 05:55, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 05:55, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. I can't find any significant coverage online in WP:RS, not even in passing mentions. Still under 10 staff in their third year, according to their Crunchbase profile. The Mighty Glen (talk) 06:08, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – Hello team, this follows the basic Wikipedia guidelines and contains primary source evidence from the citation list. The size of the company is not relevant to the validity of the information on the article. To question whether this article is valid, we must also consider other articles within the same field such as CDW Corporation and SHI International Corp Hakl33t (talk) 08:50, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not about size; it's about having significant coverage from reliable, secondary sources (see WP:GNG). Also, the presence or quality of other articles on Wikipedia has no bearing on whether this particular article meets the notability standards (see WP:OSE for more on that). clpo13_(talk) 17:42, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For arguing that "other stuff exists" in Wikipedia, Hakl33t, see "other stuff exists". -The Gnome (talk) 13:58, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete on the basis of subject failing WP:NCORP. Cannot find much, either. Hopefully, WP:TOOSOON. -The Gnome (talk) 13:58, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete As per nom, fails GNG and WP:NCORP. Zero indications of notability. None of the references are intellectually independent and none meet the criteria for establishing notability. Fails GNG and WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 14:19, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I believe this is a secondary source of information that was cited in the article, "Cheryl (February 9, 2017). "Board of Trustees of Community College District No. 508" (PDF). City Colleges of Chicago" I'll add additional sources and edit the document. Please provide some additional feedback, I appreciate you all helping out on this. Hakl33t (talk) 02:38, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete looks like advertisement Heshiv (talk) 10:31, 28 May 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.