Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Divvio

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 speedily deleted by User:Jimfbleak per CSD G11 (unambiguous advertising of promotion) and CSD G12 (copyright infringement). (non-admin closure) • Gene93k (talk) 16:36, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Divvio[edit]

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

This page fails to provide sufficient context to explain the subject and appears to serve only to promote its subject Rubbish computer (talk) 19:10, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:42, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:42, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:42, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:42, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep AfD is WP:NOTCLEANUP, if the article sucks then it needs improvement not deletion. The article contains a list of reliable sources and interviews, which while all dead links can for the most part be easily accessed through web.archive.org. Clearly notable. Bosstopher (talk) 00:14, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, multiple issues for six years, web site offers an "early access" newsletter, and a few Google scholar hits in the direction of "Hype Cycle for Media Industry Entertainment, 2007" also suggest dead since 2007. –Be..anyone (talk) 12:03, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:15, 16 April 2015 (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.