Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catbird Networks


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:37, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Catbird Networks

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Lacks notability. There is basically no reliable, nontrivial third-party coverage of this company, and the article reads like a pitch. --Falcon Darkstar Momot (talk) 10:43, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:56, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:56, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:56, 2 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom - David Gerard (talk) 18:47, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete there are several give-aways here, one is that the company information was copy and pasted here, the second is the one-time-used account and then the next is the fact the current contents listed are still trivial and unconvincing, from the PR information to the thin and barebone sources that actually never say anything significant. SwisterTwister   talk  01:56, 3 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete – Source searches are not providing any significant coverage in reliable sources. Does not meet WP:N. North America1000 08:44, 3 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:PROMO; strictly corporate spam. K.e.coffman (talk) 09:07, 5 October 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.