Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Opsview

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. TheSandDoctor ^Talk 03:30, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Opsview[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

product brochure, not encyclopedia article. Would be unacceptable even if it were notable, but there's no evidence it is . DGG ( talk ) 01:38, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:40, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:40, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Blatant advertising. RobinCarmody (talk) 21:58, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: An article originally created by a WP:SPA, with a PROD removed by an IP shortly thereafter. The article is currently effectively a product brochure (especially in the promotional claims added in April 2020); that said, earlier instances did have some sparse references, including a LinuxWorld award in 2008 for Altinity Opsview v2.12 [1]. There is also a "Monitoring with Opsview" how-to manual. However I am not seeing sufficient evidence for either the company or its product to demonstrate attained notability. AllyD (talk) 18:38, 25 January 2021 (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.