Deletion of List of shell providers

Comment: Never should have been created, being an action done unilaterally without any agreement on the parent article talk page. Articles labeled "List of..." '''do''' need sources. I mean, consider the claim being placed against them (be it good or bad), and it's being done so without any given proof from an outside party confirming it. This is rather strictly upheld in terms of  articles, and companies shouldn't be treated any differently. This makes such articles impossible to maintain, as mentioned by Bwilkins above. Past the horrible and possibly defamatory corporate info claimed, even if that can be supported by some third-party reliable sources (as in, technology magazines or sites, not blogs or forums), it won't resolve this challenge because of the notability issue
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: As agreeing inclusion criteria in the lead (as per ) is being actively resisted then there seems little to stop this article being on ongoing magnet for non-notable account providers and their websites
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists (WP:LSC)