Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EIBS
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 in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Fritzpoll (talk) 12:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
EIBS[edit]
- EIBS (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Appears to fail WP:N, WP:WEB. 16x9 (talk) 13:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: The article was missing an AfD tag. I've tagged it but hold no opinion on deletion. Powers T 14:18, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. EIBS Ltd is a UK based supplier of content management system. - yet another non-consumer online business using Wikipedia as a free ad server. The only showing of importance is a client list, which means that there is no showing of importance. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:07, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 17:07, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Userfy Currently an advert, but a google news search indicates, the subject itself might just be notable enough. Let's give the author some guidance and see what happens. - Mgm|(talk) 09:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
:*It is an essay but WP:ITSUSEFUL. Most if not all of those results are not about this product. 16x9 (talk) 02:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Delete - I'm not strongly against this one but I don't think that notability is established. The Google News search linked above has numerous hits but the vast majority of those are completely unrelated to this subject (apparently "Eibs" is not uncommon as a surname) and almost all of the relevant hits are press releases. I did find some limited coverage by the Nottingham Evening Post but I don't think this is enough. -- Atamachat 17:19, 27 February 2009 (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.