Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Content Automation

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. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:46, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Content Automation[edit]

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

Prod disputed. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Dusti ^{*Let's talk!*} 21:26, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete - Per WP:G11. The article is written in a promotional tone, and the talk page of this article makes it plainly obvious the intent is to promote. James1011R (talk, contribs) 01:31, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - for so many reasons: no sources, promotional tone, etc. However, if user:Bill Mendelson is only this account, he is a new-be and needs some guidance. I don't believe his article was malicious. Dinkytown talk 16:48, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete. Absolutely nothing good to say about this unverified spam. --Mr. Guye (talk) 02:48, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete At best this is WP:NAD. At worst it is a candidate for Speedy Deletion as spam. Either way Delete. --Jersey92 (talk) 16:55, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Although I do think there is an article to be written on this topic. This article doesn't explain exactly what it is, but here and here it is defined as inputting some keywords so that a tool can go out and grab someone else's content and format it for your page. Not recommended, and probably not what this article was supposed to be about. – Margin1522 (talk) 06:59, 18 December 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.