Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rainforest Media Server

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 both per lack of reliable sources or other indication of notability noting, however, that Janmedia hasn't been tagged in connection with this AfD but for its own. Tikiwont (talk) 10:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rainforest Media Server[edit]

A newly released and not yet notable software product. Wikipedia does not allow this sort of advertising, we are not a database of companies either. In this consideration I'd also like to include the parent article Janmedia for deletion, as there is not verification by reliable sources of notability. Keegan^talk 03:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless evidence of notability is provided through reliable sources. Terraxos (talk) 04:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both. Both articles created by the same single purpose account. Neither the article on the company nor the article on the product make any claims of notability, and no third-party references are provided. —BradV 04:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 06:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Probably too new - [1] and [2]. No hint of notability here. Perhaps with time though. Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 07:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's a tangible product made by an international company with famous partners so I think it should be kept Tchefari (talk) 14:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above user is the sole contributor to the two articles in question, and has made little or no edits outside of those pages. —BradV 15:00, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Look at my French profile to see my contribution to Wikipedia... :) Tchefari (talk) 21:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both because they fail WP:N. ArcAngel (talk) 14:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The service is as famous as websites already present, no? Afrikfree (talk) 02:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is not. There is nothing famous or notable here, the software returns less than 100 results from Google and I found no media coverage in those results. Keegan^talk 02:38, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the closing administrator, the above user's only comment resides in this discussion - most likely a WP:SPA or a sockpuppet. Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 02:41, 2 April 2008 (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.