Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kynamatrix


 * 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 keep. Nom changed mind, WP:V sources added, copyvio apparently taken care of. Pigman ☿ 06:37, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Kynamatrix

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This article makes no attempt to follow Wikipedia's conventions for formatting, linking, organization of topics, etc., and may have been put here only for the purpose of advertising. Also, this copyright notice:
 * © Copyright 2007 Collegiate Presswire, Inc. and LifeSize Communications

appears at the bottom of the article; that is certainly inappropriate for a Wikipedia article. Michael Hardy (talk) 01:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Clearly the article has changed. In its present form, I no longer find any reason to delete it. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. No assertion of notability. Academics get up to all sorts of non-notable stuff. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Verifiable by reliable sources. This is a refreshing entry and after checking the references, this is a notable achievement, the first of its kind. RareEntity (talk) 08:09, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete damn, did someone copyright this page or something? Anywho, it's a copyvio nonetheless. Either spam an overzealous information paster. I also think the person above me is either the person who created the page or a sockpuppet Doc Strange (talk) 14:31, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The most recent edits have transformed this article from something that clearly should not be here to something that I would not have nominated for deletion. I'm going to seek the advice of a person who may have some relevant expertise. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:24, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep All that was objectionable in the article is no longer there. Michael Hardy (talk) 21:53, 1 January 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.