Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AppGreen Marketplace


 * 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. Davewild (talk) 20:03, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

AppGreen Marketplace

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable software and a bit spamish and adding to WP:CSB. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 07:29, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:00, 21 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Maybe worth noting that after this AfD began, the original contributor added a note to Talk:AppGreen Marketplace with claims to notability, but without verification (use of words like "awesome" does not constitute WP:RS). Maybe also worth noting that an article bearing the product's simpler name "AppGreen" had been created and speedy-deleted shortly before this one, although with a different creator account. AllyD (talk) 13:42, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm not finding evidence of notability. (If someone did verify the award claim on the article Talk page, then I may reconsider.) AllyD (talk) 13:46, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 00:15, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:47, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:08, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete non notable. The article only cites the App's own website and I wasn't able to find any other sources online.  The little green pig (talk) 00:18, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - Refs provided have vague editorial policies and authorship information, and appear to accept payment in exchange for reviews, and are thus not RS; created by an SPA as likely spam/promotional. Dialectric (talk) 09:00, 18 January 2013 (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.