Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SilverFast


 * 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   keep. Obvious notability, however, it does read like an advertisement. The article needs cleaned up (granted by the template on the page) (non-admin closure)  D u s t i *poke* 05:44, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

SilverFast

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Notability, looks like spam. Darxus (talk) 00:07, 19 December 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:31, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: Obvious notability, including numerous 3rd party refs already in the article. Can't imagine why this is AfD, looks perfectly good. Maury Markowitz (talk) 02:42, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Not sure if it should stay or go, but it should be noted that - if kept - the article needs to be cleaned up. As well, there are several Wikipedia accounts directly linked to the company that occasionally edit it in a promotional manner. --Ckatz chat spy  09:56, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:30, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: Nice article, content is relevant, perhaps a little advertising, but this can indeed be changed. --Pflaumenbaum (talk) 10:58, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note that the above account's only content edit (prior to today's vote) was an edit to an article about a project sponsored by the manufacturer of Silverfast. --Ckatz chat spy  22:33, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Keep --Sven Boisen (talk) 13:48, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note The above user has an apparent connection to the company that produces Silverfast. --Ckatz chat spy  04:04, 29 December 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.