Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oevo

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:57, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oevo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Asserts the 6 months old WP:NCORP policy. scope_creep (talk) 00:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:18, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:18, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:18, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This is so clearly promotional. No way does it warrent any Wikipedia article. 70.27.95.244 (talk) 22:48, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete the whole app isn't notable. And it does actually seem to be written in a non-neutral tone. Let me know otherwise and I could change my vote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:A99F:FB3F:F994:8E6E:C475:1748 (talk) 00:44, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete now Delete as there are non-primary sources available, but many are mere mentions and others are very biased in ways. Certainly not enough coverage to pass notability. Handoto (talk) 17:08, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Changing my vote to delete as looking through the page edit history, the app founder has been making his own edits to this article. Along with the fact that there is very limited and not enough coverage to deem this notable, the whole article's neutrality is now at risk here. Handoto (talk) 17:27, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as reasoning above. Promotional like crazy. Not notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.139.232.234 (talk) 15:01, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete has some sources, but I believe not enough. They said above that the article is promotional, which I agree with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.47.183.114 (talk) 20:54, 25 September 2018 (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.