Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1stPayPOS


 * 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. Graeme, the issuu reference you linked is a tradeshow handout which is generally a paid advertisement for the company in question. As there are no other independent references, this article is deleted. Nakon 06:54, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

1stPayPOS

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I prodded this with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (software) requirement.". I also requested that "If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back." This was deprodded by User:Graeme Bartlett who stated "prod removed, WP:GNG already checked, and unreasonable request ignored." Not sure which part of my request was unreasonable, but I think that editor needs to read up on GNG. This spammy software article that Graeme approved at AfC is not supported by any reliable sources. It has three badly formatted footnotes, and a list of external links, to 1) a local radio station - 404, 2) a local newspaper (?) - article available after payment, visible part doesn't mention the company 3) an article in a digital magazine that seems self-published, 4) few more brief mentions on dubious-looking spammy websites, likely PR/self-published pieces. We require reliable sources showing significant coverage, not links to few websites and promo pieces. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:01, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - I found lots of press releases but nothing else. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  09:45, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. I can't find any evidence that this app is selling, that it has any customers, or that it has anything more than press releases going for it.  Not even the parent company appears to meet our notability standards.  Risker (talk) 02:02, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak delete - the Courier Post story is pretty good (yes it's a newspaper) as GoEMerchant seems to have made the 1stPayPOS product. (It should be pretty obviously from the picture in the free preview, incidentally.)  However, that is pretty much it as far as good sources go.  It is possible GoEMerchant is notable, so one possibility is to rework this into an article about them, but the 1stPayPOS product doesn't appear to have sufficient notability for a stand-alone article. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:52, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:14, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:14, 3 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep The references have suffered some linkrot and paywalling in the last year. But the issuu.com references is substantial and independent enough. Last year there were three suitable references available.  So the WP:GNG applied then.  I will see if the decomposing references can be resurrected. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:33, 3 April 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.