Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DataSynapse


 * 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 of the debate was Delete.  (aeropagitica)   (talk)   19:17, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

DataSynapse
Vanispamcruftisement, innit. Recury 19:25, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * "Enabled" - check. "Leverage", too.  Fails WP:CORP.  Delete per nom. Tevildo 20:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per hilarious nom. Very well put, Recury. ---Charles 20:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I can't claim credit for that one, unfortunately. Recury 20:06, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Aahhh... very good! Now, that's a neologism I can live with! Cheers! ---Charles 21:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Although somewhat notable in some circles not notable enough for wikipedia.--Nick Y. 20:06, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Deletionalize. Tevildo, you forgot "virtualize business-critical applications". NawlinWiki 21:11, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete ad. JChap 21:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as blatant ad, but a Buzzword bingo bonanza. Fan1967 21:32, 26 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Edited by DataSynapse. Folks - I have edited this to address everyone's comments. This is essentially a listing of a business in New York.  This format on this page is modeled after Identify software (who seemed to have reached compliance with policy). Hopefully these edits will be sufficient.  More edits can be made if needed.  I would rather have this listing stand rather than be deleted.  Please let me know how I'm doing! --Data Synapse 19:11, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Articles aren't deleted because they are bad articles, they are deleted because they are on subjects that are not appropriate for the encyclopedia. That is what Tevildo is referring to when he mentions WP:CORP, which is a guideline that says which corporations can have articles written about them. WP:VANITY also applies, which is a guideline about conflicts of interest. If your company is notable enough to warrant an encyclopedia article, then you shouldn't have to be the one to write it. Someone else will. Recury 20:02, 28 June 2006 (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.