Deletion of CamGSM

Comment: This is pretty scant coverage.  The company name is mentioned briefly in one article and the other article where there is some additional "coverage" is in some minor trade publication which I could find had only been used in one other article in all of wikipedia as a reference.  Like I said originally, the only notable thing that ever happened to this company was an investment in it by a small private equity firm that seems to be eager to draw attention to itself.  I think when you step back this is a stretch.  It is one of six or seven mobile phone companies in Cambodia (maybe it is the largest but where is the verification of this?), there is limited third party coverage and the only reason there is an article is because a problematic COI editor intends to use it for .  I tend to be an inclusionist but I find little reason to support keeping this article.  There is limited content of any value and if you wanted to save it, the better route would be to show what would be done with the article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Advertising (WP:ADVERT)

Comment: per . No significant secondary coverage to establish notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)

Comment: per {{user|Whpq}}. There is significant coverage in |reliable sources. See http://books.google.com/books?id=-pPz78d5xSgC&pg=PA3&dq=CamGSM&hl=en&ei=hdR1TJaJIo36sAOosNGgDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=CamGSM&f=false this entry in "Asia Pacific Telecom Newsletter" and http://books.google.com/books?id=XjG0AAAAIAAJ&q=CamGSM&dq=CamGSM&hl=en&ei=hdR1TJaJIo36sAOosNGgDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CEkQ6AEwBg this entry in ''Country Report: Cambodia, Laos''. These sources, coupled with those found by Whpq, are enough to establish notability. That CamGSM is the largest mobile telecom provider in its country strongly indicates that there are non-English sources about CamGSM; this would further establish notability. However, the sources found in this discussion are enough to establish that this company passes Wikipedia:Notability (company) and this article passes Wikipedia:Verifiability due to the nontrivial coverage in several third-party reliable sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)