Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hitachi Content Platform

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--Ymblanter (talk) 11:12, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hitachi Content Platform

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

A huge advert, a full brochure, with specs and all, of a proprietary database. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:00, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:12, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:12, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have the following questions:

What specs do you see on the page? I do not see any specs.
As far as I can tell, the page contains general info. Can you please point out the reason(s) why you think the page is "a huge advert"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thergon (talk • contribs) 17:28, 24 March 2015 (UTC) — Thergon (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete Unreferenced spam. --MelanieN (talk) 21:03, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
DELETE Spam. No cited references, let alone 2nd or 3rd party references. Thergon, who commented above, is the primary author trying to protect his creation. This has been around far too long. Tapered (talk) 03:01, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:21, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:43, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There are still no references whatsoever--for a large size article. Plus a graphic that's almost certainly copied and pasted from promotional/technical literature for the product. Tapered (talk) 03:56, 8 April 2015 (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.