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 keep, nominator changed !vote to keep and no deletes sources added. Non-admin close. Jfire (talk) 21:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alenty[edit]

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

no notability per WP:Notability

The article besides having references to a few blogs does not establish notability per WP:Notability guidelines. Igor Berger (talk) 14:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• What doesn't look notable here is a company with a demo for a web audience measurement tool, so delete unless the currently cited blogs are backed up by reliable sources.--Tikiwont (talk) 15:31, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep company gets plenty of hits (especially in France) and probably is notable - article will be a sure keep if it provides verification references.--VS ^talk 21:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and Userfy I would say keep if WP:v can be established. I tried Googling for secondary references like news paper articles but could not find any in English. Mayabe there asome in French. I do not know if they could be used? I have found reference to venture capitalist funding for the company in this blog article Also I recommend that the author declares any association with the company as to avoid WP:COI issues. And to be extermly careful when editng this article and any other articles in the related field, if such relationship exists. Igor Berger (talk) 22:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• That's a brilliantly funny set of requests coming from you Igor - thank you that'll make a lot of people have a good chuckle. I also wonder if you should be voting twice (given that you lodged the request for deletion and not just as a procedural request.--VS ^talk 22:47, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please count my vote as one. After I nominated the article for deletion I found additional information on it that I thought would be useful with respect to the article's case. Igor Berger (talk) 22:51, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can change Delete and Userfy to Userfy being that I nominated the article for deletion and that was my vote that has not changed. Igor Berger (talk) 22:55, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:CORP. Notable especially in France. --Veritas (talk) 23:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  Per CORP it must be notable per secondary Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable_sources. Has this notability been established? Did you find a source in French language? Igor Berger (talk) 11:00, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per CORP. I like to change my vote because it seems notability has been established. Although in French, it is still notable per Wikipedia. an award from industry source. The article will need some help for wikifying because the editor is still not aware of all the wiki syntax. Igor Berger (talk) 13:43, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• If you wish to change to keep as the nominator then a withdrawal of this AfD is probably a fairer process.--VS ^talk 20:07, 5 March 2008 (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.