Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FastReport

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 05:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FastReport (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

no assertion of notability. Articles covering this all appear to be from user-submitted sites. Ironholds (talk) 14:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I dont agree. Some links point to the same website but the authors of the linked articles are all different people! Teonieuwlande (talk) 20:13, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  Ignoring for a second that this is your first contribution, making the whole thing very dodgy, that's not the point. The websites are user-built ones, and as such not reliable sources in the first place. Ironholds (talk) 20:57, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Shortage of reliable sources. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or explain how to fix it First of all I'm completely new at Wikipedia, but I was contacted by the Fast Reports Inc. to help them to not delete this page (I'm a reseller of Fast Reports Inc. products for Italy).

Fast Reports Inc. has already a Wikipedia page at Fast Reports (Russian Wikipedia).
This should be the English one page and they asked me to create an Italian one too. I don't know how Wikipedia works, but this is what they would like to have: the English and the Italian version of the Russian page.
Please, help us in these steps. Thank You--Andrea Urbani (talk) 08:16, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So you're creating this because FastReport told you to? You're right, you don't understand how Wikipedia works; read WP:COI and WP:ORG. Ironholds (talk) 08:56, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, promotional and no reliable sources. --Nuujinn (talk) 23:05, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• 1. Fast Reports exists. And it is article about FastReport ^[1] (software product). How software product can told?
• 2. The main source of information is the manufacturer's website. With links. What is wrong? You can see here [1] set of books about FastReport - how to work with it. But article in WiKi is not the learning book.
• 3. I do not see some promotional or advertizing in article. Facts only. Yes, not all the facts from FastReport (for example nothing about "best reporting tool and product of the year 2004" by DelphiZine - project delphizine closed ^[2], but I have found article copy: ^[3])

Best Reporting Tool

Race to the swift. It's been a long time coming, but FastReport (FastReports) has finally taken first place (42%), from Digital Metaphors' ReportBuilder (33%).

...

Product of the Year

Surprise! It's another repeat - and another tie. Product of the Year goes to Help & Manual (EC Software) for the second year in a row. This time however, it must share the honor with FastReport (FastReports). For history's sake, here are the winners and runners-up for POY since the award began in 1996:

* 1996 InfoPower, (unknown) * 1997 InfoPower, Orpheus * 1998 InfoPower, Apollo * 1999 ReportBuilder, Orpheus * 2000 ReportBuilder, Apollo * 2001 ReportBuilder, Advantage Database Server * 2002 ReportBuilder, Advantage Database Server * 2003 Help & Manual, ExpressQuantumGrid * 2004 FastReport and Help & Manual (tie for POY)

, but all other in articlie - facts too. Not any "better, faster, etc.". 80.80.109.172 (talk) 13:51, 12 April 2010 (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.