Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GigaTribe

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. Aside from the obvious conflict of interest issues, the article is not supported by reliable independent sources. The only sources cited are the company's own website and a site that merely lists downloadable software programs. NawlinWiki 03:28, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GigaTribe

GigaTribe (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Related template: Template:Latest preview release/GigaTribe (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

delete all – This is an unremarkable product of an unremarkable company (CSD A7). The article was previously deleted as CSD G11. The editor's only contributions are to this article and linking to it from various articles, which is consistent with conflict of interest. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 16:48, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Delete The company seems to be spamming many, many websites with such adverts for this program. It is also non-notable.CommunistHamster 17:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Weak keep - 79,800 gHits would suggest some notability, and their claim of almost half a million users should be taken into account (with a grain of salt, naturally). I don't think the fact the company engages in spam is relevant, and the article itself is far from insalvageable. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 14:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 13:31, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• Very weak keep- Hexagon1 is right; 79800 google hits should not be completely discounted, also, www.technorati.com has "everything in the known universe" about GigaTribe, and there is quite a bit. So, I think it should be kept but needs major revamping. I also think that the spamming is irrelevant, unless the article is spammy, which it is not in particular. Neranei ^T/C 23:18, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

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.