Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SeeVolution


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:04, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

SeeVolution

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This company does not appear to be notable. Only news hits found were press releases. Eeekster (talk) 17:42, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Originally blatant spam created by a spam-only account. The article has been substantially despammed, but there is still no evidence of notability. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:29, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:27, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:27, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:27, 21 September 2012 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 22:18, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 00:16, 5 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Promotional, no indication of notability. A search for news sources brings up no results outside of PR releases.--SGCM (talk)  02:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I've picked up a few articles about the subject, including those found in the article ( and ) as well as, , , . I see no problems with using only the facts found in the company's press releases, such as , , and . --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 05:11, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete lacks sources to establish notability. Sources out there barely mention the organization, or largely regurgitate press releases. Vcessayist (talk) 02:28, 7 October 2012 (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.