Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Analytical Graphics


 * 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 no consensus. After three relists and a lack of discussion, consensus cannot be determined. (non-admin closure) &mdash; Music1201  talk  13:22, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Analytical Graphics

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

My own searches have simply found unacceptable sources overall, advertorial contents, press releases and other unhelpful links. My examinations here have found nothing actually convincing for any applicable notability, there's certainly not inherited notability from having Space Foundation certification. I'll note I frankly nearly tagged as speedy or PROD. SwisterTwister  talk  21:44, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  21:46, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  21:46, 29 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a forum for corporate advertising. Sources inadequate. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:48, 29 June 2016 (UTC).


 * Hi, first time poster just signed up to plea with you not to delete this article. The advertising you cite is likely for products that are free such as STK and Cesium. Also worth noting the page has been in existence for at least eight years. Please to inform me what sources are inadequate or missing and I will be more than happy to improve the article. Astronika (talk) 02:24, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astronika (talk • contribs) 02:18, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * we need to see significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. See WP:GOLDENRULE. ~Kvng (talk) 18:10, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:46, 6 July 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:28, 13 July 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: final relist &mdash; Music1201  talk  17:46, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Music1201  talk  17:46, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - Multiple offices and a significant web footprint. Meets GNG, I believe, see, for example THIS coverage in the book The Future of Business: The Essentials, by Lawrence Gitman and Carl McDaniel. Carrite (talk) 01:25, 23 July 2016 (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.