Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colayer (2nd nomination)
- 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 no consensus. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 00:36, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- Colayer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Dubious notability per WP:Corp. Most of the references are blog posts. JaGatalk 21:44, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SparksBoy (talk) 19:26, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - the only coverage I was able to find is this. That's not enough to establish notability for the company. -- Whpq (talk) 16:03, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There is one more. If that too is not enough I guess this article can then be classified as a Stub? Dhoom4 (talk) 06:30, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Two article sis better than one, but for a company, that's not very much coverage. -- Whpq (talk) 10:23, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep - little published coverage, but it's also interesting to see how much this article has changed. It appears that the work of a IP user in 2008 reduced the article from 13 KB (when I last worked on it) down to just 3 KB. At the time had a bit more on their core product and decent references. Tiggerjay (talk) 22:07, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I'd say that the IP user edits arguably improved the article. But in any case, the references actually are not decent. Some are to colayer's qweb site so they aren't independent. Metalayer was an earlier company started by the founder of Colayer so again its not really independent. Others include a web forum, a copy of a press release, home page of a company using Colayer which simply says "powered by Colayer", and a list of bios from a conference. None of those sources would establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 11:13, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Few more references - May be this explanation helps. This includes a ref. to a Swiss online newspaper and Russian press recently & a growing community on Facebook Dhoom4 (talk) 01:57, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I'd say that the IP user edits arguably improved the article. But in any case, the references actually are not decent. Some are to colayer's qweb site so they aren't independent. Metalayer was an earlier company started by the founder of Colayer so again its not really independent. Others include a web forum, a copy of a press release, home page of a company using Colayer which simply says "powered by Colayer", and a list of bios from a conference. None of those sources would establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 11:13, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 20:51, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - This page is now online since more than 2 years on Wikipedia without media presence - for the first time, Colayer got media attention in the last 3 months due to its similarities to Google Wave. Once Wave will be released later this year, there may be more coverage. I also find the quality of this article good, neutral and informative enough. I suggest to keep it and review it in a few more months again.--Antigoned (talk) 07:55, 13 September 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.