Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Progressoft

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 of the debate was Speedy delete as recreation of deleted content, which had gone through a proper AfD. (See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/ProgressSoft.) It was probably recreated with the wrong name to intentionally evade the AfD history. It will be protected against recreation; however, pleae feel free to bring a deletion review. --Nlu (talk) 10:08, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Progressoft[edit]

Article written like advertisement. A google search for Progressoft gets only 2160 results [1]. See also ProgressSoft and Progresssoft--PatCheng 06:48, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and rewrite, moving it back to ProgressSoft. Although the current version reads like your typical vanispamicruftivertisement, their press coverage page shows they've been mentioned in the press multiple times, such as here and here. These are not mere reprints of the company's press releases, and hence the article when rewritten will satisfy WP:CORP point 1. ~~I will do the rewrite right after posting this.~~ Done, rewrote and stubbed the article. Kimchi.sg 10:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and move to ProgressSoft – now that it has been rewritten – Gurch 11:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and move per Gurch. Paddles 12:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep rewrite, definite claim to fame. I'll move it now... Just zis Guy you know? 13:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment an important part of the claim to fame that is found in the reference was omitted in the redraft. This is only the first such software developed by a Jordanian company, not the first such software. The article does satisfy WP:CORP point 1.GRBerry 02:51, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Insufficient notability. --Nlu (talk) 10:02, 19 May 2006 (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.