Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bitweaver2
In my opinion  isn't really the issue here. Any claims about third parties that are made in the article are referenced and  specifically allows self-published sources to be used in articles about themselves. As I see it notability is the problem, and it is important to remember that, despite earlier claims,  and  are ''only'' guidelines and not policies, and that  is not even a guideline. As a proposed guideline it should be treated with a great deal of caution - a criterion that it puts forward may be the opinion of no more than a couple of people, and may be gone tomorrow. The wikilawyering by the article's supporters isn't helping, but I'd ask everybody to look at the article again and ask yourself whether you would nominate it for deletion if you came across it at random. I'm not arguing in favour of it because I fixed it up (I've fixed up articles and still argued for them to be deleted), but because I think the bar for notability here is being set too high when compared to other articles we've kept (kept ''after'' AFD, not kept because nobody has put them up for deletion yet
— User:Yomangani, 23:28, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:V||WP:V||WP:CORP||WP:WEB||WP:SOFTWARE (Wikipedia:Verifiability)