Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Task Squid

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 --Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 23:31, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Task Squid[edit]

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

No sources found for this website, apart from their own cooperate twitter and facebook accounts. Doesn't seem notable Random Time 17:46, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No assertion of notability. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 17:48, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
delete. i couldnt find any independant google hits for this application, and the article doesnt verify notability either. also the article reads like an ad. --Brunk500 (talk) 17:51, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no signs of notability, fails GNG. Haakon (talk) 17:56, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Request to remove deletion notice I'm not familiar with all the wikipedia logistics, but this entry is no different then many of the applications listed on List of project management software. --Tracysurf (talk) 18:56, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Answered on your talk page. Bottom line, read our notability guidelines. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:57, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per the above. --Glenfarclas (talk) 19:44, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per there being no assertion of notability -- role^player 23:30, 16 December 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.