Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SmartClient

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. –Darkwind (talk) 07:33, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SmartClient

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Contested PROD: "No credible indication of importance; likely COI in creation of article, completely unsourced apart from to the company's own website."

Since the PROD, additional sources have been added; however, they are partner companies and UGC. None of the sources added are independent, and after conducting BEFORE, I can't find any reliable independent non-UGC sources that have significant coverage of the software. There's a couple of bits on "DZone News", but I think that's UGC (and I don't think it's SIGCOV either), and the only other significant mention I can find is two sentences in a book describing it as "a bit slow". Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 08:18, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 08:18, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 08:18, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 08:18, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, not significant and reliable coverage - too much UGC. --Micky (talk) 17:28, 20 June 2020 (UTC) Blocked sockpuppet Malcolmxl5 (talk) 03:31, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amkgp 💬 09:47, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no mainstream news coverage that I could find, and the name is very generic, making it harder. I don't think industry media like InfoQ counts. I like InfoQ a lot, but they cover a lot of stuff, Wikipedia shouldn't have articles for all those obscure libraries. --Ysangkok (talk) 03:54, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:28, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:31, 10 July 2020 (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.