- 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. Jayjg (talk) 02:17, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Alertsec Xpress (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Promotion for non-notable product; article written by single-issue user with possible conflict of interest. The article was deprodded by adding non-significant sources, and I'm unable to find anything significant. Haakon (talk) 08:32, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - as per nom - non-notable product Codf1977 (talk) 09:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. ╟─TreasuryTag►consulate─╢ 09:30, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:17, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Obvious spam, and the sources don't meet WP:N. It gets exactly one google news hit, a mention in passing here Pcap ping 15:44, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - one Google news hit; doesn't seem to have the significant third party coverage required to merit inclusion. Cocytus [»talk«] 02:14, 15 January 2010 (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.