Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EspoCRM (2nd nomination)

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. ✗plicit 01:55, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

EspoCRM

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This article has been speedily deleted and recreated multiple times, per the page logs. The sources in the article are personal/corporate blogs, documentation pages, WP:FORBESCON, or sources that don't cover the source significantly (e.x. it's got a one-sentence mention on a list containing 101 open source apps). I'm unable to find independent coverage by multiple reliable sources which cover the software significantly, so I believe that this software fails WP:GNG. — Mhawk10 (talk) 19:28, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Mhawk10 (talk) 19:28, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. — Mhawk10 (talk) 19:28, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — Mhawk10 (talk) 19:28, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:06, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete due to the lack of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. XOR'easter (talk) 17:39, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - those few sources which are significant are unreliable, and those which are reliable are insignificant. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NCORP. Ganesha811 (talk) 00:09, 20 April 2022 (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.