Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HiveOnDemand


 * 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. Jayjg (talk) 02:30, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

HiveOnDemand

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

The article fails to meet the notability requirements of WP:PRODUCT. No independent sources are given and a Google News search only shows press releases and derivative material rather than articles demonstrating notability. Ash (talk) 22:22, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- Ash (talk) 22:23, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong delete as spam. Only one news archive hit, and that's a press release. Pcap ping  22:41, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this service. Joe Chill (talk) 00:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, clear promotional page for a non-notable software product.  Glenfarclas   ( talk ) 01:40, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, also unambiguous advertising: provides a quick, easy way for individuals and small to medium sized businesses to build, edit and manage dynamic treemaps without the need for specialized IT infrastructure and personnel. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 16:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Spammy delete. That is a speedy delete for spam.  JBsupreme (talk) 11:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree that article currently does not pass the requirements of WP:Product along with lack of independent secondary reliable sources establishing notability. Calmer   Waters  10:19, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - doesn't appear to meet WP:PRODUCT to merit inclusion; a little on the spammy side as well.  Cocytus   [»talk«]  05:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete No independent sources to judge. An additional delete comment here seems unnecessary but the previous software AfDs seem to be getting POINTy opposing votes unrelated to any clear rationale and closing administrators seem be counting votes, and not considering reason. Miami33139 (talk) 22:41, 12 January 2010 (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.