Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Certified for Microsoft Dynamics


 * 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. Tone 09:29, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Certified for Microsoft Dynamics

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

(Previously prodded and de-prodded) This was Microsoft's former method of certification of add-ins for Microsoft Dynamics. The two links provided are now dead. The article itself is little more than a press release of what CFMD entailed. There are no external reliable sources of information about it. I looked on PartnerSource and basically everything that was once there about CFMD is gone now. So there's no hope of improving this article or even providing verification for the things in it. B (talk) 10:31, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. B (talk) 10:31, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. B (talk) 10:31, 13 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment the article reads like a technical manual, however having wikipages about Microsoft certifications is useful. --Devokewater @  14:36, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Having an article about certifications is useful, I agree. However, this certification no longer exists.  All information about it has been scrubbed from Microsoft websites and there was never any third party information about it to begin with.  So it would be patently impossible to write an article about it that meets our verifiability and reliable sources rules.  And whereas certifications like Microsoft Certified Professional are a meaningful topic to discuss independent of any particular product, CFMD is really just a certification program for one product and there is really nothing encyclopedic to say about it other than maybe a one-liner in the article about that product. --B (talk) 18:01, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom --Devokewater @ 18:24, 13 August 2020 (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.