Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GFI Software (2nd nomination)

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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 13:40, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

GFI Software

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/GFI Software
• Articles for deletion/GFI Software (2nd nomination)

GFI Software (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Still fails WP:CORP; most content is merely documentation that the company exists. FalconK (talk) 01:43, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete as we seriously cannot take literal what happened in 2005, a time when Wikipedia was certainly at its worst considering all levels, this is still not having any actual significance and, let alone for actual notability. There is nothing suggesting what would be needed, since it is not improvable by any means. SwisterTwister talk 01:36, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:59, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:59, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:59, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

• Comment PC Mag and InfoWorld magazines contain several reviews of their software. You may check these on Google books. I will add direct references to the article later (today, I hope...). Pavlor (talk) 05:54, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
  • That'd be useful - I had a look and didn't see those - David Gerard (talk) 08:02, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
    • I added in the "Further reading": 3 + 3 reviews in InfoWorld/PC Magazine, article on The Register about SORBS purchase and article on iX/heise.de about TeamViewer sale (there may be more of this kind in the German press/news). All these sources are available online (I can add direct links to magazines on Google books, but it is easy to find them with current full references). Pavlor (talk) 17:32, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
• delete - I can't find anything except corporate acquisition details - David Gerard (talk) 08:02, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

• Delete -- an unremarkable SW package / company. Not notable per available sources. Article content was mostly spam / "product brochure" advertorial. Article created by Special:Contributions/GelegerGFI so paid editing is about 100% certain, which is against policy. Let's not encourage the spammers by keeping this article. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:34, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
  • May I ask what sources could show notability for Wikipedia purposes, if even several reviews in published magazines aren´t enough? Pavlor (talk) 18:57, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

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.