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. – Juliancolton | Talk 02:27, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

TeamSnap (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)

It's quite clear this is only existing for the benefits of company advertising and it's clear also since the sources are simply published and republished advertising therefore not actually independent, significant, substantial or convincing at all especially when the article history clearly shows and confirms it. We never make compromises with such blatant advertising especially when there's the advertising consistency (note it's quite suggestive this article may be paid advertising). SwisterTwister talk 17:20, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. North America1000 09:03, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. North America1000 09:03, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:33, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:14, 26 December 2016 (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.