Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AAfter Toolbar


 * 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 speedy delete as non-notable Web content (A7). Author blocked as an apparent role account. Blueboy96 21:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

AAfter Toolbar

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable, advertisment created by someone with a conflict of interest. Contested prod. KTC (talk) 19:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: The creator contested G11 speedy nomination by someone else with "I believe this information is as useful [or more] as the information about Google Toolbar or Advanced Toolbar for the Wikipedia users. This toolbar is one of its kind so far privacy is concerned. This is the first browser based toolbar that has no monitoring server attcahed to it. Browser based similar toolbars discussed in the Wikipedia so far all have monitoring servers attached to it. I request not to delete the article without investigating." -- KTC (talk) 19:14, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

This privacy browser toolbar is around over two years. It has recently been added to the download.com. Regards, --Aafter (talk) 19:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)Subhankar Ray I edited the article to focus on facts. Hope that will make it more useful for the visitors. Help me out in editing it if you think it still feels like an advertisement. This is no more or less advertisement than Google or other toolbars we have in Wikipedia--Aafter (talk) 20:14, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Was just about to nominate this, you beat me to it. COI and WP:N concerns here.  Equazcion •✗/C • 19:13, 24 Mar 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I tagged it as CSD#G11, but it failed. Delete per Equazcion. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 19:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment it was speedied as spam; I declined it because it seemed factual, not advertising. I have no opinion on whether it is significant, --and of course COI is not by itself enough reason to delete. DGG (talk) 19:36, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I have to disagree there -- this does seem a lot like advertising to me. There's also absolutely no notability established. And of course the COI. I'm not sure how anyone could argue to keep this, barring editing the article.  Equazcion •✗/C • 19:43, 24 Mar 2008 (UTC)
 * I just checked out the download.com page. This toolbar is just over a month old with just under 100 downloads so far. This is a definite case of advertising IMO.  Equazcion •✗/C • 19:48, 24 Mar 2008 (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.