Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Analysis Group

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 KEEP. It doesn't read like an ad now, must have been redacted. Herostratus 05:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Analysis Group

Analysis Group (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Fails WP:SPAM. It reads like an advertisement and is an advertisement. Diez2 18:56, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Analysis Group is a privately held company that competes in the same markets as LECG and CRAI; article should be revised for NPOV. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fruits (talk • contribs) 13:07, November 19, 2006.
• Delete Definitely an advertisement. ¿ςפקιДИτς! ☺ ☻ 19:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --- RockMFR 19:12, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep After doing some research (very hard with this company as the term "analysis group" is used alot) this appears to be an important US national research company. Studies and experts at this firm are constantly cited by news organizations and other companies such as Johnson & Johnson [1][2][3]. An article of something notable looking like an advert means there needs to be a content change, not a deletion. --Oakshade 00:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep per Oakshade. --- RockMFR 01:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Analysis Group easily meets WP notability guidelines: A quick search of nearly any good news search will turn up dozens of articles about our work- Try the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times, for instance, on which a search produces several dozen articles. These alone meet WP:NN criteria for inclusion easily. -Lanoitarus _^(talk) .:. 23:07, 21 November 2006 (UTC) [Comments revised by Lanoitarus, 11/27/2006].
  • I should probably also add that I agree the article as it stands could use allot in the way of improvement. Someone basically paraphrased whats there from the front of analysisgroup.com. -Lanoitarus _^(talk) .:. 23:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
• Re-write. 38.100.34.2 00:22, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

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.