Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Mental Health Software Development Companies


 * 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.--Fuhghettaboutit 04:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

List of Mental Health Software Development Companies

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

A combination of original research and a list of external links. De-prodded with comment wrongful tag..pan dan has a hx of deleting contributions without following proper wikipedia process...shame.... Pan Dan 14:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Linkfarm, possibly crystal ball given that the companies are predicted to succeed.   FrozenPurpleCube 15:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

You have to watch this Pan Dan...he has a hx of tagging things he does not like...emotions and opinions do not belong here...wikipedia wants worthy contributions that are in the public's interests...shame on you...

Florenda 15:15, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that attacking the nominator doesn't actually make for a good case. If there is any validity to this article, it's best to explain that first.  While there are certainly times when a nomination is bad faith, I don't believe this is one, and I'd say that this user has been responsible in regards to this nomination.  Therefore, if you do believe the nomination was mistaken, I suggest you try to convince the rest of us, not by attacking Pan Dan, but by telling us why it should be kept.  FrozenPurpleCube 15:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as original research, and no independent reliable and verifiable sources. This reads more like a promotional tool for the links listed. DarkAudit 15:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:OR. Deor 01:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete though i would not call it OR--there is no OR necessary to accumulate an indiscriminate directory--but this article seems the very essence of linkspam, and the sort of list that definitely is not encyclopedic. DGG 03:54, 9 May 2007 (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.