- 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:56, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Checkster (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Company does not appear to meet our notability standards, see WP:CORP. Sources all look like PR releases. Contested prod. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:13, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No evidence of notability, bordering on WP:CSD#G11 advert. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:23, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:51, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:51, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:52, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Leaning towards delete - There doesn't seem to be sufficient and substantial sources to build a good article. At Google News, a "Checkster 2006" search provides one press release (useless for Wikipedia) and two archived HR magazine links which are somewhat helpful but not enough (one link mentions the product). Another search, "Checkster Yves Lermusi" also provided links mostly press releases and some third-party such as this (not very useful though, mentions one client but a news search with that didn't provide much). The link is from 2007 and news searches don't provide anything else so who knows if that was (1) a substantial customer and (2) even a client anymore. Another link here is third-party but the preview doesn't provide much. There's another link this but it really doesn't provide much. There's also this but it seems to be more of a recommendation, and the last link here (very brief mention). Searches at Google Books only provided this (a brief mention). One of the current references in this article is this one which doesn't say much and claims it will talk about the product again soon but a search at the website only provides two other links (the latter a republished press release) which is not much. Prior to ending my searches, I searched further and further but failed to find anything promising aside from more press releases of course. I have no prejudice towards userfying or a future article when the time calls for one. SwisterTwister talk 02:51, 22 September 2013 (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.