- 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. Kurykh (talk) 03:51, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
- ServersCheck (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)
A7/G11 was contested. This article is about a run-of-the-mill software company that has been deleted in the past under the A7 and G11 criteria, and was recreated two days after that. While the language has been cleaned up a bit, overall the page still serves primarily to promote the topic, and the coverage received is mostly PR pieces or tech websites noting that the software is now freeware. Google News search turns up a grand total of seven hits, one of which being pure PR, and the others not meeting the assessment standard of WP:ORG when applied to WP:GNG. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:24, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- Delete (note: I declined the CSD) I couldn't find any non-PR sources, and the self-help book cited mentions the product with two sentences in a list. Almost all potential sources appear to be trivial mentions of the software product rather than the company. Appable (talk | contributions) 22:17, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- Delete as clear advertising alone with the confirmed signs from the history. SwisterTwister talk 21:43, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
- 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.