Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SlipStream Data


 * 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. BJ Talk 01:00, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

SlipStream Data

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

also included in this AfD:

I recently deleted a newly created page twice under CSD G11. I received an email from the creator of that page asking why I deleted his article but not these articles. I looked at both of the pages, and neither is referenced and neither provides any assertion of notability.

I looked for info on Google but I could find no sources for either page. In addition, both of the pages are clearly written like advertisements. Apparently, these pages got passed over in Special:Newpages when they were created. No assertion of notability + spammy tone = delete.

tl;dr version: If I saw either of these pages while patrolling Special:Newpages, I would have CSD G11'ed both without hesitation. J.delanoy gabs adds 06:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete all - per above. J.delanoy gabs adds  06:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - they're just ads. Agree with J.delanoy, would have CSD'd them both. Chaldor (talk) 07:55, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * And I am a leader in the field of deleting spamming articles. Delete  P HARMBOY  ( TALK ) 17:19, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable. If there turn out to be notable facts about this subsidiary of a notable company, they should be included in the RIM article. Bongomatic (talk) 06:04, 6 October 2008 (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.