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. Fritzpoll (talk) 10:01, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Softbrands[edit]

Softbrands (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This article reads like an advertisement, and relies primarily on its own website for sources. Further, it seems all the external links are to Softbrands websites (seems like spam) and the already-existing orphan tags are a sign that this article was added for advertising purposes only. I do not see anything encyclopedic or particularly noteworthy about this topic. Also, as the primary editor of this article is a Softbrands employee, one can clearly see how this violates WP:COI. How can there be any doubt this is being used solely for advertising? Timneu22 (talk) 10:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:55, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:56, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. TexasAndroid pretty much says everything that I would say.--CyberGhostface (talk) 16:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Obvious delete per Timneu. ╟─TreasuryTag►ballotbox─╢ 11:18, 2 June 2009 (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.