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 delete. Wifione ^Message 13:13, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CS Networks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

non-notable company, no verifiable references akaDruid (talk) 17:59, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:30, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:30, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:30, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yunshui 雲‍水 14:23, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete No evidence found that this firm meets the notability criteria. AllyD (talk) 21:12, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, I am unable to find any WP:RS, at least in English sources, to show notability. --Kinu ^t/_c 23:54, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, not notable. -- Wikipedical (talk) 05:46, 15 November 2012 (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.