Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inpay


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 01:44, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Inpay

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

No apparent notability. Removed on "reference" that did not refer to Inpay. Remaining reference is a patent application. No reliable sources provided, none found. Previously speedied as spam. Contested prod. Mdsummermsw (talk) 14:14, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree with nominator, this is blatant advertising (and I couldn't find anything reliable either). Drmies (talk) 14:24, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. →Wordbuilder (talk) 14:41, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep There is also a EU patent application - I believe this indicate notability Ecommerce99 16:13, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Does a patent itself make something notable? Even if it does, does a mere patent application make something notable? →Wordbuilder (talk) 16:19, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Barely any information around on this subject, most of it (if not all) is from the company itself. I don't think applying for a patent makes something notable. Bill (talk 16:21, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete While the hawala exchange system is fascinating, this software isn't. Two patent applications do not establish notability. gnfnrf (talk) 19:57, 20 October 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.