Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BoonEx

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:25, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BoonEx

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

I declined the speedy request and PRODed instead. PROD was removed by original author. The author clearly has a conflict of interest. In addition the article makes a claim of notability but has yet to document that via reliable sources. And third, the article reads much like a sales brochure. It probably could have been speedied for that reason alone but because of the claim of notability I did not. I brought it here for community input. JodyB_talk 11:47, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- The-Pope (talk) 12:40, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- The-Pope (talk) 12:41, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Failed to find sources to establish notability. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 13:19, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Most of the sources I could find were press releases and hobbyist sites. It's fairly high on Alexa rank, but that doesn't satisfy N. Christopher Connor (talk) 14:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There's simply too little (reliable) sources to establish notability. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 ^(Contact) 14:14, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. References supplied are internal or to directory listings, and I found nothing more informative. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:25, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:31, 17 October 2010 (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.