Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Burning Vision Entertainment (2nd nomination)

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. J04n(talk page) 00:59, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Burning Vision Entertainment[edit]

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

The previous deletion discussion suggested it was a fast rising corporation, and it was kept. But there is no evidence of rise, no notability is asserted in the article, and there are no WP:RS references. Delete as non notable corporation Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:01, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:05, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:05, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:05, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:05, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I am not finding any discussion of this company in Google, Highbeam, Questia or a couple of UK newspapers. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 18:08, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It exists but does not satisfy WP:CORP or WP:GNG Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 01:53, 24 April 2013 (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.