Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DomainTools


 * 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. Vanamonde (talk) 08:04, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

DomainTools

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No reliable sources found to verify notability Finnishela (talk) 16:09, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:04, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:04, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:04, 13 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete There's tons of press releases and other examples of trivial coverage such as announcements of reports, participation in events, new product announcements, acquisitions, and quotations of company experts etc. Not a single independent, quality source whose primary topic is DomainTools. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:38, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment This reference from morganlinton provides a good account on the *products*. I believe if this article was about the *products* and not the company/organization, it would pass GNG. The question is, does this article provide an adequate starting point or should it be scrapped? In my opinion, it could easily be started over with no loss of info. What do others think?  HighKing++ 17:36, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Does that amount to more than two sentences of information? Why not redirect to WHOIS and write two sentences there? We don't always have to create a separate article on a topic, just because we can. If the DomainTools content in WHOIS ever expanded to more than one paragraph, then we could spawn a new article at that time. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:21, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, at this time I can't see how this would be enough to support a whole article. Finnishela (talk) 15:47, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Company is not even close to notable. I'm not convinced that its products/services are notable either, but agree with others above that it can be developed at WHOIS and split off again if there seems to be sufficient content. Daask (talk) 21:00, 21 August 2018 (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.