Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eiffel Software Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Eiffel_Software

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. Kurykh (talk) 00:32, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eiffel 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)

Non notable WP:MILL company with no sources. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 19:56, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. clpo13_(talk) 20:00, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. clpo13_(talk) 20:00, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:32, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as corporate spam; no indications of notability or significance. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:33, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as literally not changed since it was noticeably started for sole advertising motivations hence that says alone, what makes it worse is the fact (1) it has never changed, and instead kept exactly like this and (2) the fact there's then literally nothing else to suggest this company is actually significant. SwisterTwister talk 06:47, 13 November 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.