Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Safe 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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:09, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Safe Software

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

PRODed as advert with no good sources; PROD removed and article rewritten by apparent company source. The new version still has almost no RSes and is substantially primary sourced; several claimed sources do not mention the article subject at all. Complete failure to demonstrate WP:NCORP; if this is the best the company itself can do with its complete clippings file to hand, this suggests there really aren't any RSes or evidence of notability. David Gerard (talk) 12:04, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 12:05, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 12:05, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 12:06, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:PROMO; this is a product brochure in the form of a Wiki article. Not a WP:WEBHOST also applies. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:16, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This falls far short of WP:CORPDEPTH. The coverage in reliable sources is almost zero. Add to that the promotional article and this is a clear delete. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 09:23, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is not one good source available. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 09:24, 20 September 2016 (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.