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 both. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uneinvitation[edit]

Non-notable website, no claim of notability for the site or the software. Corvus cornix 21:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Add article Creator has created a duplicate article at UneInvitation which should be included in this AfD. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:07, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It looks more like spam than an artical!! Yourname 00:30, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletions. —User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:51, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - looking through the google news archives, all I can find are press releases. -- Whpq 19:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looks like spam. -- Dougie WII 16:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as insufficiently notable per WP:WEB#Criteria. — Satori Son 16:45, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete spam. --Bradeos Graphon 16:46, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both, I don't think this site meets the WP:WEB criteria. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both, per FisherQueen. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 05:34, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tip to nominator: Consider using the proposed deletion process for uncontroversial deletions, such as this one. Thanks! -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:44, 4 November 2007 (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.