Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agent Logic


 * 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. Courcelles (talk) 20:12, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Agent Logic

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Reads like a promotional ad piece, and parts of it are uncited (and possibly copyrighted). Placing it here for community input. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:58, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

*Strong Delete Site appears to be down. Possibly they went under. scope_creep (Talk) 22:18, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Company seems to have been absorbed into Informatica as detailed. [|Informatic News Release]. Don't know what bearing it has but did seem to be a market leader.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:02, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:02, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:02, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. Lacks reliable independent secondary sources discussing the subject in detail to demonstrate notability as required by WP:GNG.  I am not impressed by the sources offered and was unable to find anything better by Googling.  If better sources can be found, I am willing to change my !vote.  Msnicki (talk) 03:54, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor Talk! 03:21, 29 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete and Redirect to parent company Informatica.Software company article of unclear notability. The it-director.com ref is paywalled, so its level of coverage is unknown, but in any case one RS is not sufficient to establish notability, and the other refs are a non-notable award and a routine announcement of a business acquisition.Dialectric (talk) 16:54, 5 October 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.