Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RMTrack


 * 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. EdJohnston (talk) 19:02, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

RMTrack

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Promotion for non-notable software product; article by single-purpose user who is a manager at the company. I have been unable to find any significant third-party coverage in reliable sources and I cannot see any indication that this article passes WP:GNG. Haakon (talk) 21:30, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I do not see anything that is promotion - I just see factual software information similar to the wikis of the other 45 issue tracking products in Comparison of issue tracking systems as such I recommend keep User:Nahouw —Preceding undated comment added 21:50, 1 March 2010 (UTC). — Nahouw (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Being "factual" is not a keep reason in itself. What we're discussing is whether or not the subject of the article is notable in the encyclopedic sense. Also note that other stuff exists. Haakon (talk) 22:07, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Haakon (talk) 22:09, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Only one reference to RMTrack at StackOverflow.com which is a community of software engineers and programmers. If they don't talk about it, chances are no one else does either. Google books and scholar searches don't have any mention of this software either. Michigangold (talk) 12:09, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as spam. Pcap ping  20:37, 2 March 2010 (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.
 * 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.