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 09:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Celoxis[edit]

A privately held company, solely the workd of Celoxis (talk · contribs). Advertorial in tone, may be a response to deletion of redlinks from numerous list articles. No evidence of meeting WP:CORP. May have the potential to be fixed (please feel free) but the current content fails to establish importance and reads like an advert; better to have nothing than this I think. Just zis Guy you know? 10:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello i have fixed this article, can we close this discussion ?

Delete, per nom. This is a advert/spam. Rob (Talk) 11:08, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If Celoxis is notable enough for an article, then I imagine this could be NPOV'ed. However, I feel unqualified to decide if it is. If the writer or anyone else could provide a bit of documentation about Celoxis from a reliable source, it would be a bit easier to decide. GassyGuy 11:31, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I got 31500 hits for it on Google, which doesn't seem like a lot for a software product. I couldn't find any real discussion of it online. One site I saw listed various similar packages and gave the number of pageviews for each entry; Celoxis had a pretty low number of page views. Even if the article was improved - it has NPOV issues - the package seems to be Not Notable. --Brianyoumans 21:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Dlyons493 Talk 23:59, 18 July 2006 (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.