Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avaza (software)

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:30, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Avaza (software)

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

Standard promotional software blurb: borderline A7/G11 but the text isn't quite fluffy enough to be G11 and the article is technically about the software and not the company, so not A7 eligible.

The sourcing in the article at present doesn't meet WP:CORPDEPTH, is run of the mill listings of software in top 5/top 25 lists, or is recycled press that doesn't count towards notability under WP:SPIP. One a WP:BEFORE search, I could find no additional sourcing that would bring the article up to our standards. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:19, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:38, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:38, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:38, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - As noted, close to G11, and fails to satisfy notability for either company or product. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:43, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Half the article is about people, not the software. Weakish references/sources but mainly WP:TOOSOON I think. If it is to be notable it will get better referencing naturally over time. Aoziwe (talk) 01:00, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Robert.--SamHolt6 (talk) 01:40, 15 August 2017 (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.