Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geocap (mapping & modeling)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Fluxbot (talk | contribs) at 16:03, 1 October 2016 ((Task6) HTML cleanup of Category:Pages using invalid self-closed HTML tags). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 16:03, 1 October 2016 by Fluxbot (talk | contribs) ((Task6) HTML cleanup of Category:Pages using invalid self-closed HTML tags)
- 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. Stifle (talk) 09:09, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- Geocap (mapping & modeling) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable company that produces software that hasn't received significant coverage in independent reliable sources. See the above {{find sources}} links.
The few references to software with this name (none to the company that I could identify) seem to be to a proprietary Shell Oil software package, not to this company's product. But even if it's the same product, none of the coverage is more than passing. Bongomatic 05:23, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 06:15, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 06:16, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Lack of coverage in WP:RSes = NN. --Cybercobra (talk) 06:18, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Coverage isn't extensive enough to build an encyclopedic article out of independant reliable sources. ThemFromSpace 00:57, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as per above. Rabbit67890 (talk) 02:07, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.