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. Sandstein 16:39, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Frontaccounting[edit]

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

I frankly would've PROded but it may simply be driveby removed; my own searches are not finding anything better at all than simple guides showing what the software is and how to use it; in fact, that's what the current sources are themselves; none of them actually form any significant and convincing substance, two of the even closest sources to not being as blatant (I use that with certain leniency, because the sources are still in fact blatantly PR) are the InfoWorld and TechRepublic, but I'll note they are essentially still only guides themselves. SwisterTwister talk 03:31, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Subject lacks significant coverage in reliable source. Meatsgains (talk) 03:54, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The bossie award is one indicator of notability ([1]) and the top google news search result is a bylined reliable source ([2]). There seem to be some foreign language sources as well, but I can't read them. Per WP:NEXIST, I'll !vote keep on this one. Fieari (talk) 04:11, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Analyzing this shows that the first link I actually mentioned and analyzed above, and then the second one, is in fact a one paragraph simply stating what there is to know about it, that same information was also simply compiled as a list altogether, there was no focused coverage. SwisterTwister talk 04:49, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:25, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:25, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as it stands I am entirely unconvinced by what little RS coverage there is. If kept, this will be cut to a couple of sentences - David Gerard (talk) 10:44, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:PROMO; this is a product brochure instead of an encyclopedia article, and Wikipedia is not a WP:WEBHOST for a company's promotional materials. The source offered above PC Quest: 10 accounting tools is a trivial mention among 9 other subjects. Sources I see out there are PR or PR-like. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:25, 24 September 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.