Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UPSaaS


 * 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. Sam Walton (talk) 08:34, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

UPSaaS

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article about a product or service, the notability of which seems to rest solely on a white paper. Fails WP:GNG notability. I redirected the title to Uninterruptible power supply but was reverted by the article's creator. - MrX 13:29, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. - MrX 13:32, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Delete - Redirecting to Uninterruptible power supply I don't think would be appropriate... although it has the up front aspect of a UPS it is not a UPS in the end. As described, it is a managed power supply for a complex/building/company at the source, which is not a traditional UPS. It's more of an augmentation of the electrical power company that already supplies power to these businesses/homes etc. But, as you said, "solely on a white paper"; it seems to be a matter of WP:TOOSOON because there isn't any reliable sources that expand on this or shows itself as more then a WP:DICDEF. - Pmedema (talk) 13:58, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: Seems to be a matter of WP:DICDEF here. Ayub 407 talk 15:09, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete This article lacks even the basic elements that might show it to be notable or even well-cited. It's formatted like a dictionary definition consisting of promotional materials. If there were citations and such to back it up, UPS as a service might be enough for a subheading on the UPS page. --69.204.153.39 (talk) 21:20, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:30, 6 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete as failing to have adequate coverage. Fails WP:GNG. Concerns about the security of electical supply are manifold, software controlled UPSs are part of the equation, whether these are provided in-house, or whether managed power is purchased, as in this example. The generic topic could undoubtedly use an article, but it would be better if someone conversant with the literature were to write it. The current article on Power management is very limited in its scope. Modern power management system regulate much more than just shutting down or reducing power when a system is inactive. They massage the current, correcting such characteristics as over or under voltages, cyclical variations, etc. --Bejnar (talk) 20:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as I simply see no improvement here. SwisterTwister   talk  05:04, 7 October 2015 (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.