Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DataShell

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. Client website is not a reliable source Shii (tock) 15:30, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DataShell

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

Subject lacks significant coverage in the multiple wp:secondary, wp:independent and wp:reliable sources. Therefore, it does not meet WP:NCORP standard and qualifies for deletion. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 12:49, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable. Lack of in-depth coverage in reliable sources; they're mentioned in Bitcoin blogs and directories, but nothing that meets WP:GNG. --Colapeninsula (talk) 12:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reply (cant find an appropriate area to post this)

External media source coindesk has been added to the article to provide external media source verificaiton - http://www.coindesk.com/votebox-dropbox-datashell-storage/

DataShell was one of the first services to launch for exclusive bitcoin payment and the first cloud backup service to offer bitcoin payment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mad macs (talk • contribs) 13:07, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mad macs - I've left you a reply on your talk page. This is a deletion discussion page for the article you created some time earlier. Here, we discuss if the subject qualifies for inclusion. You may find the details regarding this process at WP:AFD. I've nominated the page for deletion because I believe that the subject does not satisfy Wikipedia notability guideline. I may be wrong. If you believe, the article should not be deleted and is in accordance with Wikipedia policy and guidelines, you may place your rationale here. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 13:21, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can't find substantial coverage of this software in independent secondary reliable sources. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 15:01, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 25 June 2014 (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.