Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unified SCC


 * 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 because there's really no notability here. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :)  05:27, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Unified SCC

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

Article fails WP:NOTABILITY. Article was created by an WP:SPA account with no other edits other than related to Unified SCC/aigenta.com. Self-promotion and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopaedia article. Hu12 (talk) 08:00, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete cannot find reference of Unified SCC in any books, new archives or scholar papers, fails notability guidelines Atyndall93  |  talk  09:46, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability is unclear; however, this tool is very fresh. Information in this article is correct and objective, as a programmer I found it quite useful. ZealousCoder (talk) 06:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 23:56, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - The article is unsourced, ok, unsourced. I googled it, 723 results. So we have an unsourced article created by an WP:SPA, with low Google hit and low traffic |here (visited only 441 times in April). Delete per WP:NOTABILITY. ⇨ EconomistBR ⇦   Talk  16:27, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Notability, unreferenced, SPA/COI. Plenty of reasons to delete not any reason to keep other than useful, which isn't enough.  Dimitrii (talk) 03:12, 26 May 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.