Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PJ Technologies


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 01:01, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

PJ Technologies

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is almost a speedy candidate, but it has already been recreated after a PROD once, so we should have a definitive discussion. This article is sourced only to the company's own website and their (also self written) page on spiceworks.com. I've looked in the usual places and I cannot find any in-depth coverage of this company that isn't a press release or similar. I think it fails both the notability criteria for companies and the General notability guideline and should be deleted. MrOllie (talk) 16:11, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

You're comment, "This article is sourced only to the company's own website and their (also self written) page on spiceworks.com" is inaccurate. Spiceworks is not a self-written page of PJ Technologes, but rather a community of independent IT professionals stating their own un-solicited reviews and opinions of Goverlan, the software product of PJ Technologies. You may have found difficulty in finding varied sources on PJ Technologies, as we are almost always referenced by our product name, "Goverlan". Our software offering is largely discussed by independent reviewers    , journals    , and competitor analyses Thus making PJ Technologies, the creator and distributor of Goverlan, relevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pbergeot (talk • contribs) 16:43, 6 November 2014‎ (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:47, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:47, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:48, 6 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Strong delete Blatant ad. The sources cited above are not sufficient to establish notability:
 * 1) Hassel's blog post carries the disclaimer that it is advertising
 * 2) TopTenReviews sells the software
 * 3) WindowsITPro seems to be a proper review
 * 4) SoftPedia sells the software
 * 5) Tech Target's 'review' is written by Hassel - see #1
 * 6) BIMmuse is a blog post
 * 7) InsuranceWeek: just a press release
 * 8) Jovenski et al. (2014) - I don't have access to SPIE Proceedings, but it does not mention Goverlan in the abstract, and there are no references (where Goverlan would be mentioned). See also below for Jovenski et al. (2013)
 * 9) Ismail et al. (2012) mention it in passing in their introduction as an example they found using a bibliographic search
 * 10) the patent mentions it in passing as an example of monitoring software
 * 11) Joveski et al. (2013) mention it in appendix 1 as one example of this type of software
 * 12) Concentrated Tech's whitepaper was commissioned by Goverlan/PJ Technologies
 * Only the review in WindowsITPro seems to be a reliable source - for Goverlan. That's not enough to satisfy WP:GNG. None of the sources establish the notability of the company. The comments above by indicate a serious WP:COI, as does  of his/her userpage. See also Articles for deletion/Goverlan Remote Control Software and WP:Articles for deletion/Goverlan VNC Viewer for closely related AfD discussions. Another related article by this user, WMIX Software, is currently PROD'ed.--Lemnaminor (talk) 09:42, 11 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 03:29, 15 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete- Software company article of unclear notability, lacking significant coverage in reliable sources. Per Lemnaminor, the sources provided above are not significant independent coverage, with the possible exception of the WindowsITPro review. This article is not sufficient on its own to establish notability. A search turned up no additional significant RS coverage.Dialectric (talk) 17:17, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: also note PJ Technologies, Inc., created by the same user and speedily deleted under G11 and A7 in September. This is actually the third incarnation of this page. Lemnaminor (talk) 23:13, 17 November 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.