Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allvue Systems


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 10:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Allvue Systems

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Disputed draftification, albeit with some work. Had this been left as a draft it might have been improved after further recommendations. WP:ADMASQ, WP:NOTDIRECTORY, fails WP:NCORP. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:51, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, Companies, Computing,  and United States of America. 🇺🇦  Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:51, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete I was in the middle of bringing this here, but beat me to it! Pure ADMASQ, sources are just press release regurgitations and the like, and a search finds only more of the same. Fails WP:GNG / WP:ORGCRIT. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:59, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @DoubleGrazing If only the editors involved in creating material like this listened during the AFC review process AfD would not be troubled so often with inappropriate unilateral moves. That one may do a thing does not mean one should. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:05, 28 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Sorry, didn't realise the process is it's kept in drafts as edits are done, I've moved it back now, would you be able to link me to the page that explains how you get reviews done in the draftspace? Squaumau (talk) 14:10, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I believe we should interpret that as a request by to Draftify the article.
 * To further your knowledge, Squaumau, I suggest you go to WP:TEAHOUSE, where you may ask all the questions you wish, or as an alternative to WP:AFCHD. Pick one or the other, but not both, please. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:15, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Timtrent, thanks for the links - I think I am requesting to draftify. I'll make sure do it the proper way going forward Squaumau (talk) 13:50, 29 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete pending a review of the sources (which I might or might not do). On its face, there are notability and tone concerns.  The article is written from the corporation's viewpoint, and does not report on what third parties have said, but that is the basis of corporate notability.  The article is blatantly promotional, and its author has been asked about conflict of interest, and has not yet had time to answer.  The article was moved into draft space by a reviewer, but moved back to article space by the author, which is permitted, but does not indicate collaboration.  The author then attempted to move the article back to draft space after it was nominated for deletion.  That is gaming the system, but that is a conduct issue, and AFD is a content forum.  Robert McClenon (talk) 01:28, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Robert, sorry about moving it to draft, I was unaware that this had to be done through someone else, I've nominated the piece through someone to be draftified. I am not an employee of the company, just have worked in the same area and thought to write an article about what I know. If it could be moved back to draft, I can work on this to improve my article creation skills, i based a lot of the tone on other live software company articles like this one - Bluebeam Software, Inc., but I obviously need to dig deeper and ask for guidance through the channels that another user pointed out above. Thanks for the help on how to make these better :) Squaumau (talk) 14:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: as per nom. In total agreement with and . - Hatchens (talk) 12:56, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. WP:ADMASQ. Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 09:39, 5 May 2022 (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.