Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Serverpars


 * 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. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 10:46, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Serverpars

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. Greek Legend (talk) 04:59, 18 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - Per WP:GNG and WP:NCOMPANY. There doesn't appear to exist any secondary reliable sources that cover the article subject in-depth. This source doesn't come close, this source (translated to English) doesn't clearly state that the article subject won any kind of award (and doesn't provide in-depth coverage of the article subject), and this source is a primary source, not a secondary source; it makes its own observations and viewpoints and does not reference other studies or sources. Hence, WP:GNG is not met and my vote is delete.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:10, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I thought Primary source is more important than secondary source. Primary source means their own website? Greek Legend (talk) 05:13, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, that would be an example of a primary source. Dschslava (talk) 05:59, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  14:24, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  14:24, 18 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as there's nothing for better independent notability. SwisterTwister   talk  05:23, 24 March 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.