Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CovySoft Networks

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. Nakon 20:30, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CovySoft Networks

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

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. " It was deprodded by User:Kvng with an edit summary of "indication of notability in cited sources", and with no ECHO back to me (despite the fact that I explicitly asked for one in the PROD). Well, I do not consider the listed sources to be reliable; they look like niche portals and their coverage of the company, from what I gather from Google Translate, is sparse - one article talks about company's CEO taking part in a conference, another one discusses the company being bought out (so, routine coverage). As I discussed in my Signpost Op-Ed, this is a good example of Yellow-Pages like company spam. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:28, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:50, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:50, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:50, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete sources fail WP:ROUTINE. clpo13_(talk) 03:52, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as none of this is actually conceivably better for the applicable notability, nothing at all convincing. SwisterTwister talk 07:22, 1 May 2016 (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.