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. Courcelles 00:52, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GetPaid[edit]

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

tagged for notability since june 2009, after searching I cannot find any significant coverage which would meet WP:CORP _nonsense ferret 02:03, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment-notability questionable. References do be developed.--Goldenaster (talk) 02:11, 26 February 2013 (UTC) — Goldenaster (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:40, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 10:41, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination; an e-commerce solution. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:53, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete if it's notable, that certainly isn't reflected in the article whatsoever. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:07, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete The Python Magazine article is a reliable source, but I was unable to find other 3rd party RSes after several searches. Dialectric (talk) 12:17, 10 March 2013 (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.