Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/QLabs


 * 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. —  Aitias  // discussion 22:25, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

QLabs

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

All references seem like press releases. Article introduced in it's entirety by the company itself and written like an advertisement. -- aktsu (t / c) 08:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete While I don't agree that the article is written like an ad, I do think that the sources provided are of questionable reliability and a brief search for sources turned up nothing better. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 09:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Sources unreliable, doesn't meet WP:CORP.  Graymornings (talk) 11:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Please recheck the link as we have made changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.225.245.130 (talk) 13:00, 6 January 2009 (UTC) Moved down -- aktsu (t / c) 13:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Non notable. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:12, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Another non-consumer tech business wants a Wikipedia article.  No showing of importance is made in the article.  Since speedy deletion is contested, allow this to run to establish a firm precedent against re-creation. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:29, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete no notability, not in neutral tone, orphaned... That can be a long list. The Rolling Camel (talk) 19:15, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, spam. Pavel Vozenilek (talk) 15:22, 8 January 2009 (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.