Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sysorb

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. - Mailer Diablo 22:25, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sysorb

Not notable article started by User:Tbf@evalesco.com (Evalesco is the seller of Sysorb). See Talk:Sysorb#notability for details. A. B. ^(talk) 16:30, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I got just 8 hits through Google before it omitted similar results. None of the eight "sources" explains why this system should be notable above all others. This may also explain why the article suffers from a lack of published references. Network and server monitoring systems, which Sysorb may typify, could well be eligible for an article on the grounds of notability, exclusive of named examples. But the article in question fails notability on its own. Ref ^(chew)(do) 17:33, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete as spam. So tagged. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 17:57, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Question about the deletion process: this article was proposed for deletion previously and then PROD tag was subsequently removed. Is it still eligible for speedy deletion? I thought a failed PROD precluded speedy deletion but I'm not seeing anything to that effect in the current version of the deletion procedures. --A. B. ^(talk) 18:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - An article is eligible for speedy deletion after the PROD tag was removed (just not for PROD anymore). Nevertheless, I've removed the Speedy tag, because the article isn't as bad as the typical spam and we may now use this ongoing discussion to determine if Wikipedia should have an article on this topic at all. --Tikiwont 18:43, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- there are more articles about other companies that are somewhat like this listed at Talk:List of network management systems#Non-notable entries. Some are obvious deletion candidates, others less clearly so. Other editors' help in assessing which to keep and which to delete would be appreciated. --A. B. ^(talk) 19:21, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, blatant advert/spam. No indication of notability. Doctorfluffy 06:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, unencyclopedic, ad. Pavel Vozenilek 18:08, 31 October 2007 (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.