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 keep. postdlf (talk) 20:01, 15 August 2013 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Michaelzeng7 (
talk) 15:03, 7 August 2013 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Mark Arsten (
talk) 17:54, 14 August 2013 (UTC)reply
Very weak keep - I'm going against all my deletionist instincts here to suggest this might stay, considering no-one else has been brave enough to put forward an opinion. But it's so borderline I quite frankly couldn't care much! The article is now sourced, the company is evidently of some considerable size with health contracts across the USA, including with
entire states. Its real estate moves get write-ups e.g.
[1][2]Sionk (
talk) 20:04, 14 August 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.