- 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. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 01:01, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- IWebsiteMaker (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)
Lack of assertion of notability, almost entirely promotional in tone, all but one "reference" refers to press release or similar promo material (the other is a one page review on a minor site) Ubcule (talk) 23:17, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Per nom. Wikipedia is NOT a "vehicle for advertising".--Hu12 (talk) 02:17, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:43, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:43, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - No coverage in reliable sources. The article's referencing consists of press releases and unreliable web site. -- Whpq (talk) 17:22, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - not enough WP:RS to verify, thus fails WP:GNG. Also google is not able to help. →TSU tp* 15:09, 30 May 2012 (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.