Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NetTradeX (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Deor (talk) 11:26, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

NetTradeX
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No indication of notability. every reference I could find is either directly from the company, or obvious PR, usually marked as such.  DGG ( talk ) 19:36, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment:
 * a) This article is an analog of other articles about similar programs and platforms: WinChart, Qtstalker, TradeStation and etc. And it is better many of them (IMHO) - you can see it yourself.
 * b) NetTradeX supports synthetic financial instruments, for example. And it is marked in the article. Do others trading platforms exist that do it? To my mind, it's unique and notable feature.
 * c) Maybe it's really difficult to find references about NetTradeX without PR, because it is doing by our partners. Unless it: or, but I'm not sure, that these links are without PR...
 * d) I would be grateful to you, if you helped me to improve the article. For instance, I can add internal links on others similar programs and platforms. Or delete that fragments, which you are considering as PR (but this artical has created as neutral). DVL333


 * Delete: I am unable to find significant (read:any) in depth coverage in reliable sources to show this product is notable per WP:GNG. BethNaught (talk) 20:01, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 12 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete and salt: A WP:SPA re-creation of an article deleted at AfD less than 3 months ago. No evidence of notability, whether as a firm or as its software, no reason to overturn previous decision. AllyD (talk) 06:45, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: I think, it's a mistake. It can't be a re-creation of a deleted article because an autor of this document (me) even haven't seen one. Moreover, I don't know who did it (although I saw that somebody had created previously article with a such name when I began to create this article). I'm sure, both articles are absolutely different. DVL333
 * Delete Per nom. and above comments. --Jersey92 (talk) 16:08, 12 July 2014 (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.