Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lawdex

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 keep. Majorly (hot!) 23:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lawdex

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

Not quite a blatent ad IMO, so not a speedy. But no particular notability evident, and all listed sources are either PR releases from the firm itself, or simple directory listings that varify nothing more than its existance, and are probably based on content provided by the firm. Even based on thso sources, the firm started actual oiperations less than a year ago. Not notable. Fails WP:CORP DES (talk) 03:37, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Based on my nom abovce, delete. DES (talk) 03:37, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Week Keep because a/the claimed 7,000 users in 21 countries is a large number for this type of service, b/ the California application is only one of the applications of their software c/ they have a partnership arrangement with IBM, I added the link. d/ refs 1 & 3 are businesswire, published by Gale. it ultimately rests on the PR, but it's an edited and reliable news service, backed by a major publisher. I would expect additional refs, and, as usual with commercial organizations, would like to see a 3rd party report on market share. DGG 05:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep - but im concerned the sources seem to mention the subject in passing, but not in depth. the_undertow talk 07:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 08:29, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - Encyclopedia value if more or less notable. Edit to make not like an ad. --Remi 09:16, 26 April 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.