Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SOTI Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/SOTI

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. ‑Scottywong | squeal _ 20:24, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

SOTI

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

Promotional/peacock article about a non notable software company. All sources either primary, or based on the company's press releases. Biker Biker (talk) 19:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I likewise attempted to find sources; one from the Sacramento Bee seemed promising until it turned out to be a press release from SOTI. Quantumobserver (talk) 22:33, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If it is deleted, redirect it to Seduction of the Innocent, like it was at the start. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:40, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom.Deathlibrarian (talk) 23:19, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per GNG and nom. SarahStierch (talk) 23:38, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Clearly fails general notability criteria. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:41, 3 January 2013 (UTC)^{expanded my vote below}[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 14:19, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 14:19, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 14:19, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 14:19, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Reuter's source is only a copy of their press release. Reiterating my comments from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MobiControl that this appears to be borderline spam from this single purpose account. Mkdw ^talk 22:08, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This company appears to fail WP:CORPDEPTH at this time to qualify it's inclusion in Wikipedia. Source searches are providing many press releases, such as this, but I'm not finding in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:09, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Notability? Clearly this artile fails general notability criteria. I think that it is is a non-notable company. Sources aren't independent! Samuel petan (talk) 13:55, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not only is there zero evidence of notability, I suspect that the company may be fictitious Winner of the 2010 Microsoft Worldwide Mobility Solution Partner of the Year Award"? Try finding a reference to this "award" anywhere other than those press releases. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:13, 8 January 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.