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 no consensus. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:05, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sky Research (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)

Non-notable corporation. No evidence of significant third-party coverage. The single citation provided that might hint at notability is the "Computerworld Honors Program", until one realizes that Computerworld honored 150 companies in 2009.[1] All other citations are from commercial sources (either the company's own website or websites of clients or partners). The description of this company as a "geophysics and aviation" company is misleading: while it uses geophysics and aviation equipment in its mission, it is neither a developer or vendor of such equipment. Its primary mission appears to be to search for unexploded ordinance at former military installations. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:21, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as lacking indepth coverage by reliable independent third party sources. If such sources are added to the article, feel free to ping my talk page. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:37, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as it is currently under investigation for major fraud as well as having over $160 million in contracts awarded since 2004. See http://www.registerguard.com/web/updates/28417796-55/sky-hodgson-research-lindbom-company.html.csp (plus, the article's the 2nd most popular article on the Register-Guard right now)
• Comment The case is being investigated by a "major fraud unit"; this does not make the alleged crime a major fraud. The case has only been covered by the local newspaper.WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 03:51, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per the reasons that 108.21.78.136 listed. To WikiDan61: oh please. A multimillion dollar international company is investigated by a major fraud unit of the United States Government and has their offices raided, guns blazing, while the story of the fraud rockets up to become the number-one story on the website of a famous newspaper? I think that's notable enough to merit a small Wikipedia page. Seriously. Don't you have better things to do than harass newbies and criticize their work? [edit: Whoa! The "delete" discussion is officially invalid. Stories by the AP, major international papers, local papers, online papers, and more: http://www.canadianbusiness.com/article/92515--ore-defense-contractor-target-of-investigation and http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120725/NEWS/207250332/-1/NEWSMAP and http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jf91fRJcgMKTPppD9USG4SDL0ZfQ?docId=cd25695dce3c45f3a15ef2a179eceb2c and http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/federal-investigation-looks-at-oregon-defense-contractors-bids-for-bombing-range-surveys/2012/07/25/gJQAHd7E9W_story.html] StereotypicalApps (talk) 01:48, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I don't see anything in this story (yes, I said this - these are all copies of the same AP story) about "blazing guns". And of which "famous newspaper" is this the number one story? It's an investigation, something the US government does all the time. If the allegations are true, this would be a case of WP:ONEEVENT. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 03:11, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The AP story is 20 hours old, while the Register-Guard story is a few days old. The Register-Guard story is the one that rocketed up to 1st place on the Register-Guard's list of most popular articles, and WP:ONEEVENT has nothing to do with this! WP:ONEEVENT is for *people* that are involved in a single event. This is a major international company, making headlines for fraud, major news stories, and headlines like "Sex, booze, Bali: Omaha corps manager at center of probe". There's even a comment from a senator of **a state the company doesn't have offices in** already. The blazing guns - that's something I heard from a previous employee of the company. The U.S. Government does conduct investigations all the time, but not nearly as often at this level. Seriously: If this isn't news, I don't know what is news. Several newspapers, international scandal, $160 *million* scammed out of the U.S. Government? I'd really like to see what you consider a major news story, if this isn't one. Do you not have better things to do than harass newcomers to Wikipedia? StereotypicalApps (talk) 19:07, 26 July 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, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:59, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The story is obviously news. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!!
• Comment To WikiDan61: I've calmed down a bit and I've reversed my stance. Feel free to delete the page; when there is more media attention in a bit I might reanimate it. Thanks, StereotypicalApps (talk) 14:31, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can always ask for a WP:REFUND, which would be entirely appropiate if this started to get major coverage. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:50, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I found several sources that seem to meet GNG: From the Mail Tribune: [2] [3] [4] [5] Ashland Daily Tidings: [6] Baltimore Sun: [7] Canadian Press: [8] Toohool (talk) 08:49, 2 August 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.