Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cybertrust
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was no consensus. There are 3 votes to delete, and 3 to keep, so the article defaults to "keep". Joyous 00:51, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)
In its current state, it's nothing more than an advertisment, but I gave it the benefit of the doubt due to the absence of any external links (so it's not strictly blatant advertising) and the fact that there might be some potential for an article here. I abstain, but needs to be voted on. -- Ferkelparade π 21:39, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Delete ad/possible vanity. Gazpacho 23:00, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. The company is real, but not notable enough to warrant an article at this point. - Jpo 23:43, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep but mark it for POV and as a stub that needs expanding. The company is real and gets 26 000 google hits. Apparently was the merger of Betrusted (which garners another 68 200 google hits) and TruSecure (263 000 google hits). Notable enough in my book. ÅrУnT†∈ 08:47, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, not notable enough. Megan1967 01:53, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Notable and worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia. VfD is not a cleanup or de-POV tool. GRider\talk 19:36, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, same reasons as GRider Bryan 22:27, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.