Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/.tos


 * 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   redirect to The Only Sheet .  MBisanz  talk 06:15, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

.tos

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article serves as an advertisement for a website - the .tos extension isn't necessary to open the file - these are plain Excel workbooks.  Ja Ga  talk 06:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * A redirect perhaps? But I don't know where to. --Ouro (blah blah) 12:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * A I have refined and cleaned the definition of the suffix. If this better? --RiTz21
 * No, I still don't believe it's enough. Agree with the opinions given below. --Ouro (blah blah) 07:22, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Whatever this is, it's unsourced, and virtually un-Googleable because "TOS" is also an abbreviation for "Terms of Service". If this article is going to have any possibility of being kept, its supporters will have to find the sources themselves. As a second choice, merge into The Only Sheet. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:11, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. The notability of the software which uses this file format (The Only Sheet) is dubious; the format itself is definitely not notable. Zetawoof(&zeta;) 02:56, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree with Zetawoof.  As a stretch, I might even go so far as to say "merge it into The Only Sheet".  Matt (talk) 02:59, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect to The Only Sheet as likely search term. -Atmoz (talk) 20:23, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


 * 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.