Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Office Timeline


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Office Timeline

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article is an advertisement. (Wikipedia is not a venue for advertisement.) The product also lacks notability requirements. Codename Lisa (talk) 08:01, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:00, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:00, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello and sorry for the confusion. I will try to add all the required information so that the Office Timeline Wikipedia page meets the desired Wikipedia quality standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbirzu (talk • contribs) 15:01, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:GNG for lack of available sources.- MrX 12:58, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: An article created by one WP:SPA account and subsequently extended by another. The advertising content could be resolved through normal editing, but the given references are insubstantial and I am not finding better, whether for the company or its products. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 13:12, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. The generic name makes this very difficult to research.  I almost gave up, but I did locate two reviews for the software:  from TechRepublic and  from Softpedia.  However, I don't think this is quite enough to demonstrate notability.  The TechRepublic piece is rather short and not very in-depth. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:11, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete -- with a section covering company's "Mission" as "To distinguish professionals through innovative presentation tools" this is purely WP:ADVOCACY and WP:PROMO. Likewise, sourcing is insufficient to meet GNG. K.e.coffman (talk) 19:08, 16 September 2016 (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.