Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eye4you

Notability in question. Possible advert. --NMChico24 04:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete only claim to notability is distributing software written by someone else. --Pboyd04 04:39, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Spam. Creator's contributions speak for themselves [1]--IslaySolomon 04:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. TheRingess 04:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete all corporate spam. SM247^{My Talk} 04:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. HumbleGod 04:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Small 4-5 man shop that would appear to only be re-distributing software (correct me if I mis-read that). Article is written by employee, so WP:VANITY conflict of interest problems. Media reviews are mainly for the re-distributed software, with scant mention of the company - with one fairly strong exception [2], so I can't see any claims to WP:CORP.Kuru ^talk 05:02, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. Kuru ^talk 05:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete Conflict of interest, however, article intended to inform rather than advertise. Nathan.manzi 05:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]