Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jatheon Technologies

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 no consensus. Defaulting to keep on the strength of Brentyoung's work with the article, and trusting his commitment to continue to improve it. No prejudice to later reconsideration if that doesn't occur. Shimeru (talk) 07:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jatheon Technologies

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

Balant advertisement KlausVetter (talk) 14:00, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:55, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:55, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The entire article reads like an advertisement about a non-notable company. :( References are all from the company website, and I don't consider any of the external links as credible sources either. The main contributor seems to be an employee or the owner of the company, which is a clear conflict of interest. The product links further make this article seem rather spammy; possibly even a canditate for speedy deletion. --Zabadab (Talk) @ 13:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, should have been speedily deleted as unambiguous advertising: non-intrusive network appliances which simplify archiving, retrieval, backup/disaster recovery, and dynamic monitoring of corporate email and messaging data to meet email archiving compliance requirements. The more dynamic you are, the more intrusive you will be. Can't be helped; can't have it both ways. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:46, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - hold on a second folks. The point of wikipedia is to enable constant editing and improving of valuable entries, no? This company, while small, is making waves in the email archiving space and should be on our radar screens. I am not an employee or owner of the company. I will take the criticism of the entry sounding too much like an advertisement (just using the immediately available information on the web) to improve the entry. Thank you. Brentyoung (talk) 16:13, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

-- Update - I removed a lot of the advertising-ish language and sharpened the language and references. Will continue improving. Thank you. Brentyoung (talk) 16:58, 6 April 2010 (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.