Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unique software systems
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was DELETED as copyvio. Robert 23:24, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Long first person advert. I have no idea how notable this company is. -- RHaworth 07:59, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- It's copyright violation and I've just tagged it as such. CambridgeBayWeather 08:07, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Having looked over the proper site [1] it may be worth an article. rewrite & Keep. CambridgeBayWeather 08:43, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- It was a "style violation" rather than a copyvio - I am sure the company is happy for it to be here - they probably posted it themselves. But it is an insult to Wikipedia to think that we will accept content like this - should be deleted for that reason. -- RHaworth 10:08, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- It is not wise to base one's decision upon information provided by the company itself on its own web site. See WP:CORP and Wikipedia:Autobiography. Research turns up nothing about this company except for business directory listings and corporate reviews that turn out to have been supplied by the company itself (see this example). There are no independently sourced works dealing with the company — no independent corporate biographies, books, teaching courses, consumer reports, or even (non-company-supplied) news articles. Nor is this company a necessary part of our stock market coverage. The WP:CORP criteria are not satisfied. Delete. Uncle G 13:29, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete As far as I can tell, it's advertising for a smallish company. Nowt more, nowt less. Marcus22 14:07, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, advertising. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:26, 2 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.