Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Go!Zilla


 * 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 - but will userfy. Bearian (talk) 14:04, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Go!Zilla

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable unsourced - PROD was removed by incivil IP —TreasuryTag —t —c 06:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete Advertising. Jasynnash2 (talk) 08:19, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete - Per nom.  a s e nine  say what?  09:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Since it's blatant advertising, I want a speedy delete. Alexius08 is welcome to talk about his contributions. 10:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. A very brief article about a commercial software product that doesn't even give any information other than defining the general class it falls within. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 13:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per RS coverage including being named the #1 utility by ZDNet, mentions in the Boston Globe and The Guardian. It needs clean-up, not deletion TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 18:32, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Travellingcari and over 300,000 results on Google. —  Wen li  (reply here) 02:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete due to lack of context and details. Stifle (talk) 18:58, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 21:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree that this could be a good, encyclopedic article, but it isn't, and meanwhile WP has been hosting an advertisement since 2004. --AnnaFrance (talk) 14:21, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete - as mentioned above, it looks like there could be reliable sources used to build a good article (or even a reasonable stub), however as it is right now I don't see either notability claims nor any reliable sources to back up the article. If this was a new article, I would suggest giving it a little time for someone to build it up, but it has been around since 2004. Wrs1864 (talk) 15:28, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin if deleted, please userfy to me. I don't have time to work on it right now but am happy to do so and then restore through DRV. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 17:44, 18 May 2008 (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.