Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Synthetic Removal Technology

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 as spam w/ no sources Shii (tock) 07:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Synthetic Removal Technology

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

Reason Jbrock327 (talk) 05:31, 29 February 2012 (UTC) I would like to delete this article I believe it is misleeding and false. I was misled into creating it by a business friend. after further review I find nothing to be acurate I dont want to misinform people nor have my name attache to antything misleeding.[reply]

I find nothing accurate about this page in contacting all references and google itself has no explanation for the term. I believe it is misleeding and think it needs to be removed. The is no such thing as synthetic removal technology. I was dooped into making the page i believe it is a hoax. please delete let me know if you need further information thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbrock327 (talk • contribs) 05:45, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 February 29. Snotbot t • c » 16:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Background: I saw that this article had been given a {{db-g7}}, and reverted that because I didn't agree that it met WP:CSD#G7 (tagger was creator and primary author, but some content was added by others). I suggested that it go to WP:AFD in order to gain wider notice. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:57, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I think this amounts to promotion for a non-notable product. DGG ( talk ) 04:03, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Promotional article where the primary author believes the content he added is false and misleading.--Kubigula (talk) 16:49, 10 March 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.