Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Netconcepts
Coming to this article as a new pair of eyes, my immediate reaction is deep unease. As it stands the article looks dangerously like spam/advertising. I'm deeply perturbed by the NZ Herald articles, which have all the hallmarks of lazy journalists cribbing from corporate press releases, and the other articles are slightly too hagiographic of the company's founder to make me feel they're unbiased. This is one of those "snowball/heck" cases: I can see the way this debate's going, but my every instinct would be to '''delete''' for lack of real ( independent, non-press release ) sources. It doesn't seem to me that this article really passes , on the grounds that we don't have enough truly independent sources. At the very least, I'd like to suggest a good '''Clean up'''. I have a hunch we're being used here, but I can't put my finger on why
— User:WMMartin, 13:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:CORP (Wikipedia:Notability)