Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DirectSmile


 * 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. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:49, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

DirectSmile

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Tone is a little too promotional, and notability is not quite enough. Jasper Deng (talk) 19:49, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:27, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:28, 24 June 2011 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:29, 30 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete, advertising: Image personalization allows for the targeted, high efficient and emotional addressing of customers in dialog marketing. The developed DirectSmile technology for image personalization establishes many possibilities for creative designs with variable contents. The different software solutions are scalable for any production volume; furthermore, they are suitable for the output on all digital printing systems as well as for e-mails, MMS or websites. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:00, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. While the article does match the tone of the company's website, and does seem to be quite like an advertisement, it has potential. Research and restyle are definitely required, but if the claims made are true and the company truly did invent image personalization, then I would say that is quite a notable achievement. If nothing else it could be useful to restructure the page into one about image personalization in general. --GuidingArrow (talk) 21:47, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per lack of third party sources. I didn't find any coverage mentioning them on both Google or Yahoo. SwisterTwister   talk  22:35, 1 July 2011 (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.