Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talent Data Exchange

: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. Sam Walton (talk) 19:43, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

=[[Talent Data Exchange]]=

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

:({{Find sources AFD|Talent Data Exchange}})

It looks like this is a software program. Article has no references, and the only link within it is to the software developer. I am not seeing enough material to warrant a notability claim for this. KDS4444^Talk 14:09, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy Delete This looks like a single use account for an advert. I would even CSD it. Yossiea ^(talk) 19:41, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

::Which is what I would have done too, Yossiea, except under which criterion? I have found that if I CSD an article and it doesn't fit into one of the CSD boxes (e.g., if I use the "custom rationale" tag), the nomination will get declined (which is frustrating, when I can see so clearly that an article such as this one warrants deletion under speedy terms). Suggestions?? Thanks! KDS4444^Talk 07:43, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:50, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:57, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Delete - Software article of unclear notability, lacking independent references. A search turned up no significant WP:RS coverage. Article was created by an SPA as possibly promotional. Dialectric (talk) 15:31, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Delete - My searches found exactly what the article contains, no solid in-depth third-party coverage overall. SwisterTwister talk 06:39, 26 November 2015 (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.