Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MetaShare

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:10, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MetaShare

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

I PRODed with "No independent sources for GNG. Mostly promotion". The creator did not remove the PROD, but essentially contested it, so as a courtesy making this an AfD. I think now it is "no independent reliable sources for GNG". Not much sources seem to be there for NWEB Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:13, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 16:38, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 16:39, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I like to have a MetaShare presence at Wikipedia is to present a better picture of what cloud computing services and collaborative softwares available on the market. All the MetaShare's competitors are already at Wikipedia such as Dropbox, Google Drive etc. I tried to write the article fact-based without what can be considered as promotion according to Wikipedia:NOTFORPROMOTION. Galobtter is right there are not much sources for MetaShare on the web (yet). This is because MetaShare previously only was sold locally on the Swedish market under a different name. This is a first version of the article, but I (and hopefully the Wikipedia community) intend to improve it and its sources continuously.--Epicurus One (talk) 10:45, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Essentially, it has to be notable. That requires sources. Google drive has many sources (being quite popular and so covered in various tech website and in the news). If you can find swedish sources good, but it may be WP:TOOSOON to have an article on it - until it has more coverage. Those competitors have significantly more coverage and so have articles. Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:52, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Article fails GNG and is WP:TOSOON. Hagennos (talk) 20:59, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, !dave 18:44, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 13:38, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Spam. Doesn't pass Wikipedia:Notability (software). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:06, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Spam. Could be nominated for speedy deletion. Capitals00 (talk) 05:49, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as this is an additional application which runs on top of Office 365 Sharepoint. It is not an official offering by Microsoft but by another company. Unfortunately I cannot find the user-base statistics or any good third party reviews or even news offering substantial coverage.--DreamLinker (talk) 05:09, 6 January 2018 (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.