Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Absorb LMS

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 13:50, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Absorb LMS

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

Simply not an overly important LMS system by Wikipedia notability standards. All references are to press releases. RBrideau (talk) 18:38, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Press release links removed. The existence of a list of commercial LMS systems creates the argument that vendors with a significant number of learners / notable clients qualifies as being relevant. Thoughts? ObviouslyIWiki (talk) 16:32, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:58, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:58, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:58, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: though I'm not sure whether this article is about company of service, neither of them seem to pass WP:GNG and/or WP:NSOFT. If not the awardspam, this would be a typical WP:CSD#A7 case. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 18:06, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Der yck C. 14:24, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

delete fails WP:CORP. being placed in top 20 of a non notable award does not advance notability, LibStar (talk) 14:35, 23 September 2012 (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.