Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DataTune
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Tone 21:22, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- DataTune (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unremarkable computer program. Previously deleted as advertising. No indications or claims of notability. No references. Google search on DataTune "Data Cleansing" shows only 24 unique results, none from reliable sources. MikeWazowski (talk) 14:40, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I kindly ask you NOT to delete this article. We will provide additional references as needed. Thanks --212.29.234.47 (talk) 15:06, 23 October 2011 (UTC)— 212.29.234.47 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- Comment The previously-deleted article from yesterday was a far more substantial article than this iteration, which barely rises above a screen-shot. It - and the arguments by its creator(s) on its Talk page - contained at least the beginning of an arguable notability. AllyD (talk) 15:51, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Web searches turn up references to other IT products of the same name (from Hitachi and a CRM vendor of that name) but nothing substantial and independent relating to this data conversion/cleansing product from Target Data. AllyD (talk) 16:55, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 19:04, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Not notable of a software. KING GRIM LOL YO WHATS UP (talk) 21:17, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Not notable. No reliable, unbiased, third-party sources. Author (Vullik (talk · contribs)) clearly has a conflict-of-interest. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 06:44, 25 October 2011 (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.