Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blogcast


 * 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 No consensus.  Citi Cat   ♫ 03:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Blogcast
violates WP:NOR, WP:V, WP:ATT, WP:RS, WP:MADEUP, WP:NEO, etc. Misterdiscreet 03:26, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and Clean This article needs to be cleaned up, not deleted. Blogcast is in use by sources such as Microsoft and CNet, it's mentioned in the NY Times as well. Joe User NY 03:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * NY Times mention of blogcast. Joe User NY 20:31, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:NOR, WP:V, WP:ATT, WP:RS - Sources in NY Times, CNet and Microsoft. Joe User NY 20:56, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:MADEUP WP:NEO - Term in use since at least 2005, obviously in use for a while (Source Google) Joe User NY 20:56, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Wimpy keep needs cleanup, and this might be better suited for Wikitionary.--Cerejota 15:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, especially WP:NEO and WP:RS. --Evb-wiki 16:41, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * weak keep - seems like it can be more than just a wiktionary entry, if the article goes into more detail about the development of the tech. I've flagged facts needing footnotes, but this doesn't seem like it's bad enough to delete anymore - certainly not worth 6 policy references in the nomination. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 22:51, 26 July 2007 (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.