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. JForget 01:45, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Docpath[edit]

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

Article about a company. Apart from having some bold text highlighting some words and expressions in a quite promotional way (which is easy to solve), the article fails to assert notability. PROD was added, but removed by another user. A Google search returned several mentions but very few pages on the subject. There is a portuguese-language link from a not-so-well-known website with information about the company making a deal or something with InfoPrint Solutions Company, but I'm unsure if that's enough to assert the notability of the subject, so I though bringing the article to AfD would be helpful. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 21:43, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't see any indication of notability, but I do see a great deal of promotional material. RadManCF ☢ open frequency 00:04, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this is a non-notable company that obviously fails WP:NOTABILITY. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 05:26, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 6 April 2010 (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.