Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gwava

: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. While noting that there is the possibility that the subject might meet WP:CORP, given !votes, one relist and after taking a look at the article I think it's better if we think of this as a possible clean start with no prejudice to re-creation via AFC by someone who can write non-promotional prose §FreeRangeFrogcroak 04:22, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

=[[Gwava]]=

:{{la|Gwava}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gwava Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Gwava}})

This looks rather like an advert for a software selling company. No references and an apparently dead external link. Peridon (talk) 20:27, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment: Highbeam turns up a lot of press releases but nothing that appears to be significant 3rd party coverage. Their product set is mentioned in this [http://www.storagenewsletter.com/rubriques/market-reportsresearch/gartner-magic-quadrant-for-enterprise-information-archiving/ 2013 Gartner report], though only as one of the other vendors who did not meet the assessment inclusion criteria. AllyD (talk) 20:52, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment - can we get some expert opinion so this one? Bearian (talk) 22:05, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete barring better sources being found. I scanned Google Books, where there are some references to the product, but no in-depth coverage. There may be some, however, and I will be happy to look at any sources that might go toward evidencing meeting GNG. --j⚛e deckertalk 01:42, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 07:36, 10 November 2014 (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.