Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MAIA Intelligence


 * 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 speedy delete under G11] criteria. [[User:Master of Puppets| Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! ☺  20:42, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

MAIA Intelligence

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

This article is blatant SPAM Lancet (talk) 14:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree.  It is also a wholly unreferenced article about a software business that makes absolutely no claim to notability. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable company; cites no secondary resources. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete for the above reasons - I would have G11'd it.--ukexpat (talk) 14:54, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Spam and tagged as such for speedy deletion. TRAVELLINGCARI My storyTell me yours 15:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete - pure spam, NN corporation with all those red links! Bearian (talk) 22:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This article is not at all spam. Its from the secured resource, from a company into business intellignec, who has a mission to democratize Business Intelligence (BI) and make it available to masses.  Business Intelligence (BI) was only meant for few expert users like analysts & top management in an organization.  But with software like 1KEY BI, the business users at the operational level can make use of BI.  Request the administrator to rethink on this.Therainsmail (talk) 08:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Therainsmail, If this were so you could have created an article about the democratization of BI, or better, added an entry about this subject to the existing Business intelligence article. What I think you won't get is the democratisation of free advertisement for your company on the Wikipedia. It would be a better start if you created a user page that allows others to talk to you. Cheers. Lancet (talk) 08:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Lancet75, have edited the article page, added references, & still want to add knowledge to the Wiki users. But while viewing other articles I found many others are also doing such Free Advertisement like SAS System, MicroStrategy to name a few.  Although I donot want to get in that debate.  Please guide me as to how improve the content & make it knwoledge rich.Therainsmail (talk) 10:25, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Therainsmail, please read this Notability (organizations and companies). If you think that other articles are spam, you are free to nominate them for deletion as I did with this one. In the end it's the editor's community and the administrators who decide. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lancet75 (talk • contribs) 11:22, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * We do not want to get into that argument. Why I referred other articles was, rationale behaviour.  If the other articles are up and accepted to the moderator, why not this article.  We have made the changes & still open to modify as per the policy.  Your suggestions to the current article would be highly appreciated.Therainsmail (talk) 10:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If the other articles are up and accepted it because of two possible reasons: (1)They are not spam or (2) They are spam but have until now escaped to the scrutiny of the editors and administrators. As for my suggestions, I have already formulated them above: If you interest is in the democratisation of BI, making BI "available to the masses" you should add an entry on the subject, and eventually a link, to the existing Business intelligence article. As for my view, MAIA Intelligence doesn't meet Wikipedia's criteria of notability and the articles content being the advertisement of MAIA Intelligence's products and services meets clearly Wikipedia's criteria for spam thus for speedy deletion. Cheers Lancet (talk) 13:34, 1 March 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.