Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Analytical Graphics (2nd nomination)

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. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:41, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Analytical Graphics

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Renominating and I still confirm everything I said at the 1st AfD. SwisterTwister talk 05:38, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 05:38, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 05:38, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 05:38, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Wikipedia is not a forum for corporate advertising. Sources inadequate. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:48, 29 June 2016 (UTC).
Delete - No evidence of notability in sources. Aust331 (talk) 11:11, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- a promo article about a non-notable company. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:22, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable per WP:COMPANY. I found no secondary coverage aside from a boilerplate description of what the company does here, but that's a largely indiscriminate source. Kingofaces43 (talk) 04:26, 31 July 2016 (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.