Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ProudNet

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. Mojo Hand (talk) 14:08, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

ProudNet (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)

advertising and fails WP:GNG. The Banner talk 23:23, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

• Delete - I cleaned up the advertisement and listspam, and what remains isn't even enough for me to understand what ProudNet is supposed to be. Unsourced and unsourceable to any reliable sources. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 00:35, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:47, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:47, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

• Delete – it's a non-article. EBY (talk) 16:33, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
• Delete. Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) It did not have any meaningful hits in a video game reliable sources search. There are no worthwhile redirect targets, such as a developer or a game that uses the technology. (The only one that mentions it is Vindictus and that part isn't even sourced.) Please ping me if more (non-English and offline) sources show in the future. czar ♔ 01:21, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Delete. Advert. Failure of GNG Mr. Guye (talk) 01:23, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

• Delete: Sadly, no evidence of notabilty. Article fails WP:GNG as a result of insignificant coverage to reliable sources.Wikicology (talk) 21:59, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
• Delete - Per WP:GNG, the nom, Salvidrim, etc. There's virtually no content left anyways. Sergecross73 msg me 15:44, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit - I have recognized the problem and edited with an objective point of view. hyej (talk) 17:08, 9 October 2014 (GMT)

For the record, the article still has no sources czar ♔ 14:16, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

• Delete unsourced advert by non-notable e-tech company.Cramyourspam (talk) 14:19, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
• Delete As with everyone else above, I can't find any sources that establish notability. I am One of Many (talk) 18:07, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit - I would like you to refer to http://www.nettention.com/en/down/proudnet.pdf . there are explanations related to reatures. hyej (talk) 11:22, 10 October 2014 (GMT)

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.