Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grasshopper (company)

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 per the disagreement on whether or not the Boston Globe article contributes to the establishment of notability. Also, there was no discussion of the other sources mentioned. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Grasshopper (company)

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

No reliable sources unrelated to the organization or product. I've already removed a section that was pure advertisement. This company fails guidelines set at WP:ORG OSU1980 13:34, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:01, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The Boston Globe coverage and the Wall Street Journal blog entry, together with the television segment, seem sufficient to establish notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 17:10, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is a phone answering service business, one of many such businesses. They got a story in the Wall Street Journal about a promotional stunt involving chocolate covered grasshoppers. They got their startup covered in the Boston Globe, which is their local paper. I don't see either of these things as being the significant effects on history, culture, or technology that would turn this business into an encyclopedia subject. This article also appears to be only about the phone service, and the promoters apparently operate several separate businesses under the Grasshopper brand. We certainly don't need separate articles about each of them. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 22:27, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Coverage by the Boston Globe and elsewhere show notability. --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:55, 8 February 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, Der yck C. 16:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning delete. The coverage in The Boston Globe concerns the company founders's idea to set up an entrepreneur's day/week. The article is not about the company itself, and it does not help to establish notability of the company. Nageh (talk) 19:34, 16 February 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.