Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EasyProjectPlan


 * 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 speedy delete as requested by author. the wub "?!"  14:35, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

EasyProjectPlan

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This article fails to assert notability and lacks any secondary sources to demonstrate notability. The company may or may not be notable but this AfD concerns the product itself. The article appears to describe a software adaption to a well-known and notable product. By itself it appears non-notable. JodyByak, yak, yak 19:44, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * In addition please see Deletion_review/Log/2007_August_23, where I have noted the lack of reliable secondary sources verifying the various claims put forth. ——  Eagle 101 Need help? 23:16, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Please delete my article. --AngellpPezzullo 14:12, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Please find reliable sources or this article and probably the other one as well will get deleted. I've tried to explain this to you in the deletion review, also please note ALL CAPS AND BOLD is not a compelling argument. Either follow the requirement of verification or let the page be deleted. Secondly there is no way I'm going to download a program from a website of a company I've never heard of without seeing the source code, not happening. I should not have to try the product out, you should be able to find secondary sources and add them to the page. (and the other one as well). This site is an encyclopaedia, not a review site on how I "think" a program is. Again all thats being asked of you is to provide some secondary reliable sources. ——  Eagle 101 Need help? 04:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I should also note that I was unable to load the source provided (its been "loading" for the last 7 minutes). Are there any other sources? How about a review? This is the responsibility of the person adding the content, to at least put forth an assertion of notability and source that assertion. ——  Eagle 101 Need help? 04:39, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * A second note: I have been unable to load the souce after changing my useragent 4 times! ——  Eagle 101 Need help? 04:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment Angell, please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Just because other unsourced, non-notable articles exist on Wikipedia is not a reason to keep similar article on other software. If that article is also non-notable, then somebody will eventually get around to putting up for deletion. Throwing a fit and making demands are not going to save this article - showing sources that show that it is notable will. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 01:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete A7, no assertion of notability. Leuko 03:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. It is not eligible for speedy deletion under A7, and it's not blatant advertising. However, it has no reliable sources, and based on that, it does not demonstrate its notability. —C.Fred (talk) 03:23, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete does not assert its notability. --Oscarthecat 10:42, 27 August 2007 (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.