Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cornerstone Information Systems Software


 * 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. Despite the small number of comments, I trust Phil's negative search for references  DGG ( talk ) 04:01, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Cornerstone Information Systems Software

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The subject of the article lacks significant coverage in reliable third party sources and fails the notability guidelines for organizations. Alpha_Quadrant   (talk)  23:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:54, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:54, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Current text qualifies for speedy deletion as unambiguous spam: ....develops travel automation software for travel agencies that automates many of the complex and time-consuming aspects of making travel reservations. Their products are categorized as mid-office automation and information management products. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:39, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B  music  ian  06:01, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 14:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. I'm not sure why the word "Software" was added to the subject's name to form the article title, but even when omitting it the Google News hits only seem to find press releases and one quote from an employee in a local newspaper, and the Google Books hits a couple of directories and another employee quote. None of this amounts to significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:07, 2 March 2012 (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.