Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Load Impact

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. Olaf Davis (talk) 12:36, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Load Impact[edit]

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

Does not meet notability guidelines. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:23, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

keep with a quick search on google, I can find several articles in newspapers and mentions about this company.Staglit (talk) 21:44, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- It is pretty much irrelevant, because the article is not about the company. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 13:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mentions are not the same as significant coverage, as described on Wikipedia:Notability. If you found newspaper coverage, you should link it here to support your position.Dialectric (talk) 02:40, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I could not find substential coverage in reliable sources for this service. In fact there is a couple of mention in the niche press with questional reliability, which I would consider to amass to one source in terms of WP:GNG. There's also a CrunchBase profile page, but this source is building idescriminate collection of IT start ups, and the profile mostly discuss the company, not the service (which is the topic of this article). — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 13:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:55, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:55, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:55, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - software article lacking significant independent coverage to establish notability - sources used in article are non-RS blogs or developer's sites; a search turned up more blogs ([1],[2]) but no significant RS coverage; created by an SPA as possibly promotional.Dialectric (talk) 02:36, 28 April 2014 (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.