Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EReviewBook

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. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 01:28, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

EReviewBook

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

Non-notable software app. Borderline spam by CEO of the producer. ukexpat (talk) 18:25, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:56, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:56, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I did a pretty long search for any sort of reliable secondary source and was unable to find any. There just aren't any reliable sources to show that this particular educational app is notable. To address the editor's concern on the article's talk page that there was a double standard at play here, most of the pages had multiple independent reliable sources to show notability. Even if they didn't, the argument that other things exist on Wikipedia is not an argument that will keep the article. All that a unproperly sourced wiki entry means is that someone hasn't gotten around to listing or speedying the article yet. To prove that the article passes notability guidelines you will have to show multiple independent and reliable secondary sources. Links to the company website and Amazon.com cannot be used to show notability, nor can links to sites where the content is user generated. (So no link to CNET unless the product is reviewed by one of the site's staff members.) Tokyogirl79 (talk) 21:15, 30 January 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]
Delete I was also unable to find any secondary sources. Danger ^{High voltage!} 02:22, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as no indication of notability per Wikipedia's GNG standards; article placed here as COI/spam. DreamGuy (talk) 20:08, 5 February 2012 (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.