Talk:V-Star Creations

This article was nominated for deletion on 30 October 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

A sister concern or a subsidiary?

The prose says that this company "is the sister concern of V Guard." The infobox says V Guard is a subsidiary, making this company a parent concern. This is an important distinction. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:05, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I resolved the issue User:davidwr. :) nicely caught contradiction by the way, infobox vs. lead, it took me awhile to see it.--User:Dwarf Kirlston - talk 03:07, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notability template

An editor recently removed the "notability" template. I am not yet convinced, but there is information at the page's AFD discussion that might change my mind. If I am not convinced, I will restore the template. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:12, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My rationale was simple. AfD will determine the notability. If it is notable it will be retained and the marker is not required. If it is not notable then it will be deleted and the marker is not required. Had an AfD not been running I would have left the marker present pending further sourcing, though I feel we are just on the correct side of notability. I will not revert a re-addition of the maker, but feel it to be tautology. Fiddle Faddle 18:27, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]