View source for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Instant payment flow

<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this page.  ''
<!--Template:Afd top

Note:  If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]].  When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result was <span id='xfd-closure'>'''Delete'''.</span> <span class="user-sig user-Quarl"><i>—[[User:Quarl|Quarl]] <sup>([[User Talk:Quarl|talk]])</sup> <small>2007-02-08 09:12Z</small></i></span>

===[[Instant payment flow]]===
:{{la|Instant payment flow}}
:{{li|IPF scheme 2.JPG}} {{added by closing admin}}

I do not think it is notable yet. Also looks like an Original research to me [[User:Alex Bakharev|Alex Bakharev]] 23:29, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Google pulls up a whopping 9 hits. [[User:Aplomado|<span style="color:maroon;">'''''Aplomado'''''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Aplomado|talk]]</sup> 23:37, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
*... and most of those are for the same single web site.  This concept appears to be the invention of a single person at the Erasmus University Rotterdam.  There is no evidence that anyone apart from that one person, who wrote about it in xyr Masters thesis, has acknowledged this concept; and that it has gained any traction whatsoever in the world outside of that one person.  There are no papers, books, or articles by anyone else on this subject.  This is [[Wikipedia:No original research|original research]], and the article is blatantly non-neutral, being written in the first person and talking about what "we have to" do.  [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a soapbox|Wikipedia is not a soapbox]]. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 23:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
*"New payment paradigm"? Please. '''Delete''' this junk and don't go to the guy's seminar. [[User:JuJube|JuJube]] 23:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with deletion proposal. My argument is that if you take the same position w.r.t. similar articles, you have to delete half of the entire content of Wikipedia. One example: [[Turtle F2F]]. This is very original research. This is an invention of a single person supported by the university. No one has acknowledged this concept yet. The software was never released. And that has gained no traction whatsoever in the world outside of that university. 
If you need more examples I can spend some time and provide you with lots of them. What's your counterargument?
van Groningen. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:81.59.233.82|81.59.233.82]] ([[User talk:81.59.233.82|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/81.59.233.82|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
*'''Delete''' as POV, Crystal balling, and OR. [[User:Nardman1|Nardman1]] 15:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - possibly original researh, but also fails to provide reliable sources, and none are findable through googling. -- [[User:Whpq|Whpq]] 22:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>