Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Twenty20 Construction Cloud


 * 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. consensus  DGG ( talk ) 00:30, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Twenty20 Construction Cloud

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Declined CSD. Completely unsourced article, Fails GNG. KGirlTrucker81huh? what I've been doing 18:24, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. KGirlTrucker81huh? what I've been doing  18:26, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

I am not really sure why this is being considered for deletion. Twenty20 Constructioni Cloud is a viable construction software solution much like Procore or Timberline by Sage. Both of which have Wiki pages. Other than the fact that this is a newer software solution, the information is still relevant, accurate and although possibly has some advertising undertones, it is the true history of this product. There were no links to the website or product pages. No offers and no contact information. I am happy to make modifications if recommended. Any suggestions are appreciated

Brant.wadsworth (talk) 21:54, 27 December 2016 (UTC)Brant.wadsworth
 * comment just because a competitor has an article doesn't mean that any other business in that line meets criteria. Notability is based on the subject of the article, not necessarily the business they are in. Chrissymad  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


 * Delete - Software article of unclear notability, lacking independent references. A search turned up no significant WP:RS coverage. Article was created by an SPA as possibly promotional. Dialectric (talk) 02:45, 30 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - Unsourced, promo fluff. I also agree with about the possibility of an SPA.  Chrissymad  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


 * Delete: Per nom. Does not satisfy WP:GNG. GauchoDude (talk) 18:39, 5 January 2017 (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.