Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EEye Digital Security

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 03:37, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EEye Digital Security

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

Non notable, a lack of 3rd party sources, all refs lead back to the companies website in addition to being edited by what appears to be a role account. Mifter (talk) 20:33, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not voting either way, even though I started the article, but I've reverted most of the content back to the state it was in before the COI accounts took over. Still needs work but at least it isn't as offensive now. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 21:31, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lack of third party sources. I only found one mention here on Yahoo, and I saw either zero or same results on Google. It isn't a terrible article, it justs needs additional references from other sources. SwisterTwister talk 23:19, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — —Tom Morris (talk) 07:52, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 17:58, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable, as outlined above.
Keep A cursory google search (or just clicking the template above) shows an abundance of potentially reliable sources. Protonk (talk) 20:02, 12 July 2011 (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.