- 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. - Mailer Diablo 10:39, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged G11 (spam) but contested. Reads like advertorial and fails to make the case for significance, creator has contributed little else, but that does not necessarily mean much. Still looks like a press release, though. Guy 10:15, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. MER-C 11:30, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I would be interested in understanding a proper procedure here, especially given the fact that there are a series of products that are given individual entries off of the Comparison of Image Viewers section. In fact, the FlexSnap edition also contains historical data and product development information. This seems to be a specific exclusion in light of other, very similar, if not identical entries. dedmond29 15:57, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above. --Kf4bdy talk contribs 23:53, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete spam. Danny Lilithborne 02:46, 6 November 2006 (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.