Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ISA – Intelligent Sensing Anywhere


 * 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. Wizardman 02:46, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

ISA – Intelligent Sensing Anywhere

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not certain about this one, as it may have sources in other languages. Current article has maybe one proper source; an analyst report that I cannot access to verify. I also note it is only a 120-person company. Worth keeping if anyone turns up sources, as there are none present the current article. CorporateM (Talk) 02:45, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:37, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:37, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:37, 13 July 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Theopolisme ( talk )  04:43, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete for now. It looks like the article has included WP:NPOV advertorial content in its lead section for at least the past couple of years, despite multiple established Wikipedians having edited the article. It seems nobody really cares to fix the NPOV issue; so even sending the article to WP:Article Incubator won't help. (And soft deletion is too soft an option; even a zero-edit COI editor can take a soft deletion to REFUND.) If someone finds more sources (in any language) and commits to clean up the NPOV issues, they can visit Deletion Review, present their sources, get the article incubated or userfied, then fix up the article. But I think it's very possible that nobody is interested enough to bother properly fixing up the article. Cheers, &mdash;Unforgettableid (talk) 04:01, 23 July 2013 (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.