- 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. North America 1000 01:18, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Viddedit ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable web-service, Google found no in-depth coverage. Current sources fail to establish notability: #1 and #5 listings, #2 and #3 general articles about video editing, no mention of Viddedit, #4 user-written general article (user viddedit's only post), no mention of Viddedit, #6 self-published "About" information. Article was created by a now-blocked member of a larger sock-farm. GermanJoe ( talk) 06:17, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 02:16, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 02:17, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 01:27, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Delete non-notable web related service. Trivial information piece at this point in time. Kierzek ( talk) 03:08, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Delete: Poorly sourced article and my searches are identifying no non-primary sources that could indicate notability of the company or its service. AllyD ( talk) 06:54, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Delete -- advertorial on an unremarkable company. Sources are insufficient to meet CORPDEPTH and GNG. K.e.coffman ( talk) 07:15, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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. North America 1000 01:18, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Viddedit ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable web-service, Google found no in-depth coverage. Current sources fail to establish notability: #1 and #5 listings, #2 and #3 general articles about video editing, no mention of Viddedit, #4 user-written general article (user viddedit's only post), no mention of Viddedit, #6 self-published "About" information. Article was created by a now-blocked member of a larger sock-farm. GermanJoe ( talk) 06:17, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 02:16, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 02:17, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 01:27, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Delete non-notable web related service. Trivial information piece at this point in time. Kierzek ( talk) 03:08, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Delete: Poorly sourced article and my searches are identifying no non-primary sources that could indicate notability of the company or its service. AllyD ( talk) 06:54, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Delete -- advertorial on an unremarkable company. Sources are insufficient to meet CORPDEPTH and GNG. K.e.coffman ( talk) 07:15, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- 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.