Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IMDsoft

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. Michig (talk) 10:10, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

IMDsoft

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

Doesn't seem to assert much notability, reads oddly promotional (just me?). -- Kethrus |talk to me 18:59, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:08, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 14:27, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 14:27, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 14:27, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 14:28, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as although News, Books, browser and Highbeam found links, I see no convincingly better improvement but draft and userfy this if needed later. Pinging interested users Doc James and Drchriswilliams. SwisterTwister talk 07:43, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looks like paid for spam. No reviews on the topic on pubmed. Current sourcing is very weak. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:59, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree with the concerns already presented. I can see press releases put out by the company. I can see the software and company are both mentioned as part of the description of methodology used by researchers when their work is published in various journal articles. I can't however see that there is any evidence that WP:CORPDEPTH has been achieved. Drchriswilliams (talk) 07:50, 6 November 2015 (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.