Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WinAbility

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 JForget 01:27, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WinAbility

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

Very little independent coverage: may not be notable. (PROD was removed by single purpose account editor.)

talk) 23:06, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete - Lots of promotion on the name, but a google news search reveals nothing relevant (on default settings). A good reason to refer to
WP:BURDEN. Not overly promotional but without independent sourcing I think it doesn't meet notability criteria. Shadowjams (talk) 09:03, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:10, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:11, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: promotional article about a software business, fails to show minimal importance. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, a quick search finds only press releases. ``Nuujinn (talk) 11:31, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No sign of any substantial coverage in reliable sources. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 14:55, 14 May 2010 (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.